working class stiff wrote:
I've often thought the same. Kevyn's list was very nice and specific, and I also think something deeper is going on. Liberalism is at the heart of the American experiment and was the basis of its founding. It was a revolution, after all. What that revolution unleashed cannot be contained and is on-going. Liberals (as though there really is such a monolithic group) are as American as apple pie and hot dogs. We are the forces unleashed by the founders.
Conservatives just can't seem to keep up with the times and seem to long to return to mis-remembered 'good old days'. They usually forget that those good old days were also as suffused with good and evil as our own times.
Conservatives seem to think that there once was an ideal America. Liberal think that is a work in progress.
Why else would the founders have given the American people the gift of governing themselves? They knew it was revolutionary.
I've often thought the same. Kevyn's list was ver... (
show quote)
Great confusion seems to be prevalent amongst folks, regarding what ( or who ) is a "liberal" and what is a "conservative". The definitions have changed over the years and history has even been rewritten to accommodate those changes. For politicians, the motivation for the changes are clear; the need to be "different" from one's opponent.
Originally, conservatives wanted things to stay the same, for government to run as it always had. Liberals wanted government reformed, increasing individual rights and promoting democratic principles ( NOT to be confused with the party of the same name ). Those roles have almost been reversed now, where conservatives want government reformed, to make it like it used to be and liberals want things to stay pretty much the same.
Todays definitions, seem to be that conservatives want things to go back to the way things used to be, that they believe the changes of the last 50 years gave away too much. Todays liberals, seem to believe that things haven't changed enough, that more work is needed to reform government to include more folks. In most cases of folks beliefs, the actual ideology is hard to pin down, making self identification as liberal or conservative pretty cloudy.
For most here, the identification is applied by others, where, if one is disagreed with, the "other" is of the opposite bent. Even though liberal, conservative and moderate politicians all say they want the same things for the country, their methodology of achieving those things varies widely. For the most part, anything to do with increasing "stuff" for people, is considered "liberal" and anything increasing "stuff" for business is considered "conservative" - as defined by OTHERS, not the individuals themselves.
One of our biggest problems stems from the tendency to define others by how closely they agree with our own philosophies, despite what the actual definitions are. In other words, no matter what their self professed ideology is, if they disagree with our own ideology in any manner, they are of the OTHER ideology.
We are obsessed with differences instead of similarities, so by identifying others arbitrarily, we ensure that we'll NOT seek cooperation with them - because they are OTHER. Few conservatives would willingly let someone starve to death, yet resist efforts to ensure that they don't, because those are LIBERAL philosophies, at least, by their personal definition. Liberals would not willingly tolerate greater government intrusions or restrictions of individual rights, yet resist efforts to limit government and restrict it's functions, because those are CONSERVATIVE philosophies, at least, by their personal definitions.
We are doing great harm to ourselves, by placing far too much value on LABELS and their attendant misconceptions, rather than focusing on the needs of the individual, the agreement amongst ALL ideologies of what those needs are and seeking a consensus of ideas on how to achieve meeting those needs. Cooperation is NOT a traitorous word, it's a life saving word - if we'd only reach out and grab it.