Liberal conservatism

Jarod said:
Sure they hate change.. they want America to go to a place where there was no public school!
Click to expand...

We want to have an even playing field for all schools. If you yourself believe the school system is so weak that it will fail once on an even playing field with private ones, then why are you supporting them?
 
One of the paradoxes of Communism that I saw when I was one was that for communism to work and eliminate the mixed economy was to eliminate world trade. However to do this required bringing all of the worlds commodities under the control of a single government. This is why I advocated a combination of Trotskyism and Nationalism.
 
Even I do not advocate an anarchaic market... there are many special circumstances that need to be dealt with, in which certain people are certainly exploiting certain parts of the human pshyche and such. This is why an economy can't be explained by an equation as many economists like to do it, they ignore the human factor, that humans aren't perfect.

For instance, the social programs I advocate are probably more generous than the ones we have now. National health insurance, a Guarteed minimum income... why, if I told a conservative who had never heard about my free trade views and such they'd probably call me a damnable socialist. I simply believe many liberals have erred from liberalism and simply blame the rich and the markets unfairly for some things that aren't truly their fault, and have an utter misunderstanding of how an economy works. I know this, being a former socialist myself. It's a constant feeling of "if we'd just completely ignore human instinct and act in unison this way, then we could solve so many problems!". It just practically never works that way. For instance, people who say that you need to only buy American aren't really helping out the American economy. Helping out industries that we aren't good out only gives them a false hope on the world market, and encourages people to train in that area, whenever everyone could be helped out in America more if we'd simply allow them to train in an area we ARE good at and export that which we are bad at overseas. Even if we are better at nothing than anyone else, protecting our economy would make us worse off than simply concentrating on what we're good at and letting everyone else do the same.
 
You see, I constantly get blamed for "loving the rich" and hating the "common man" whenever I'm simply trying to treat everyone equally and not take sides.
 
The free market will inevitably lead to inequity in society and despite what many liberals think it will usually come about due to higher intelligence, creativity and drive more often than violent subjugation.
 
However, I do realize that it's hard to tell a starving, dying man this. Which is why I support programs to support the poor and to support people who are under circumstances they had no control over.
 
Watermark said:
We want to have an even playing field for all schools. If you yourself believe the school system is so weak that it will fail once on an even playing field with private ones, then why are you supporting them?
Click to expand...

*whistles* simple ....but very effective ..... ;)
 
The only real difference is freedom versus totalitarianism. And both main parties are infected with totalitarianism. It makes little difference if government takes over business, or business takes over government. The end result is an omnipotent self perpetuating hegemony. True freedom lovers are not represented in either party.
 
klaatu said:
As per

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_conservatism


Liberal conservatism is a variant of conservatism that combines the classical conservative concern for established tradition, respect for authority and, sometimes, religious values with liberal ideas, especially on economic issues (see economic liberalism, which advocates free market capitalism).

Liberal conservatism usually takes hold among conservatives in countries where liberal economic ideas are considered traditional, and therefore conservative.

In countries with large liberal conservative movements that have entered the political mainstream, the terms "liberal" and "conservative" may become synonymous (as in Australia), or they may be redefined such that liberal conservatives keep one of them and the other is taken up by a different group (as in the United States, where liberal conservatives use the term "conservative," and "liberal" is generally used to refer to American liberalism, a social liberal movement).

The liberal conservative tradition in the United States combines the economic individualism of the classical liberals with a Burkean form of conservatism (which has also become part of the American conservative tradition, for example in the writings of Russell Kirk).

Liberal conservative political parties exist in a number of countries, and they are usually most entrenched in Anglo-Saxon cultures.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the worst of both worlds to me!
 
AnyOldIron said:
Except in Europe, particularly Scandanavia, the UK, France etc..... Mixed economies have succeeded

We have ignored capitalisms failings since Dickensian times... Argentina, Russia, Indonesia, the great depression, IMF policy and the myriad of economic disasters extant today.

Capitalists adhere to the 'no true Scotsman' defence, 'Oh, it wasn't capitalism's fault, it was corruption / interference etc etc etc.


None of the nations listed are socialist. They are all capitalist. And none of them are even as succesful as the US in any case.


It is extremely niaive to equate capitalism with freedom. As Bertrand Russell said:

“Advocates of capitalism are very apt to appeal to the sacred principles of liberty, which are embodied in one maxim: The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate”

It is also a misunderstanding of liberalism that you equate it with some absolute or natural freedom. That is anarchism, not liberalism. Liberalism is the application of reason in social and economic issues.
Click to expand...

Liberalism is liberty.
 
Watermark said:
Liberalism is liberty.
Click to expand...


Is that what Elmo said when you pulled his string?

elmo1.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top