Nolan Chart Test

Damn Yankee said:
Yeah, the root word is "liberty".
Click to expand...

Woosh!

http://podictionary.com/liberal-podictionary-441/

The word liberal came into English from Latin and appeared first around 1375. It’s Latin root liber meant “free” although I have conflicting information on what the earlier Indo-European root was. The American Heritage Dictionary tells me it was a word that meant “grow” while Etymonline tells me it meant “people.” In either case, by the time it showed up in English it meant “free.” And the context of a liberal arts degree is that these are areas of knowledge that are not necessarily immediately practical like engineering or medicine or law, but instead areas of thought suitable for a free man. Something more philosophical. The word liberal gained the meaning of “generous” and even “large” before it took on a political meaning around 1800.
 
Rana said:
Woosh!

http://podictionary.com/liberal-podictionary-441/

The word liberal came into English from Latin and appeared first around 1375. It’s Latin root liber meant “free” although I have conflicting information on what the earlier Indo-European root was. The American Heritage Dictionary tells me it was a word that meant “grow” while Etymonline tells me it meant “people.” In either case, by the time it showed up in English it meant “free.” And the context of a liberal arts degree is that these are areas of knowledge that are not necessarily immediately practical like engineering or medicine or law, but instead areas of thought suitable for a free man. Something more philosophical. The word liberal gained the meaning of “generous” and even “large” before it took on a political meaning around 1800.
Click to expand...

:good4u:
 
Rana said:
Woosh!

http://podictionary.com/liberal-podictionary-441/

The word liberal came into English from Latin and appeared first around 1375. It’s Latin root liber meant “free” although I have conflicting information on what the earlier Indo-European root was. The American Heritage Dictionary tells me it was a word that meant “grow” while Etymonline tells me it meant “people.” In either case, by the time it showed up in English it meant “free.” And the context of a liberal arts degree is that these are areas of knowledge that are not necessarily immediately practical like engineering or medicine or law, but instead areas of thought suitable for a free man. Something more philosophical. The word liberal gained the meaning of “generous” and even “large” before it took on a political meaning around 1800.
Click to expand...

Now socialists call themselves liberal.

Deceiving many as to think thay represent liberty.
 
"Liber" originally meant "book" in Latin. My guess is that the notion that information sets us free saw the word morph into meaning both...
 
Liberty said:
Now socialists call themselves liberal.

Deceiving many as to think thay represent liberty.
Click to expand...

Again, the view that Libertarians seem to have that Liberalism has come to mean Socialism in America is just completely and totally historically ignorant. Your average Socialist party (besides the American one, which, since the ejection of the anarcho-syndicalist, has always been comparatively right wing) in the early 1900's would be Marxist (which is not the same thing as Marxist-Leninist) and have an eventual goal of securing the means of production for the working class, through democratic or other means. Socialist parties have moved far to the right from that position, and it is only now that they seem indistinguishable from social liberal parties, besides having a tendency to be somewhat more authoritarian. The big movement in British politics in the 20th century has not been for the Liberals to move to the left, it's been for Labour to move so far to the right that they are to the right of the Liberals.
 
Glorious Watermark XVII said:
Again, the view that Libertarians seem to have that Liberalism has come to mean Socialism in America is just completely and totally historically ignorant. Your average Socialist party (besides the American one, which, since the ejection of the anarcho-syndicalist, has always been comparatively right wing) in the early 1900's would be Marxist (which is not the same thing as Marxist-Leninist) and have an eventual goal of securing the means of production for the working class, through democratic or other means. Socialist parties have moved far to the right from that position, and it is only now that they seem indistinguishable from social liberal parties, besides having a tendency to be somewhat more authoritarian. The big movement in British politics in the 20th century has not been for the Liberals to move to the left, it's been for Labour to move so far to the right that they are to the right of the Liberals.
Click to expand...

I don't have such a view.

I see the right and left as the same.

I could be wrong, but you seem to point the finger at one, and embrace the other, when there isn't any difference in either one.

As a Libertarian minded person, my opinion is that I have a right to sustain my life with as little restriction from others, & govt as possible. And I expect the constitution to reflect that. The depiction you have offered is foreign to me, in regards to representing my personal beliefs. Historically, I think you see half the truth. But maybe I'm just to damn drunk to get all of what you're saying.

The right and the left want a right to my property. (16th Amendment)
They both want a right to my retirement. (Social Security)
They both want to be involved with my kids education. (Department of Education)
They both want a federal reserve.
They both support drug cartels with the drug war.
They also want to tell me what drugs I can take for treatment when I'm ill.
They both want Obama/Bainercare. (the right to own me totally)

I could go on and on, but the points are clear. Both right and left hate liberty & freedom for the individual. Which is ultimately a cancer to themselves and the ones they love. Not to mention me, & mine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top