What Is A Liberal?

[ROGER4314]

A disgusting article on Yahoo extolled the virtues of Liberals and told how sweet, lovable they really are. I couldn't stand that rubbish and had to write a rebuttal. Please feel free to comment.
==================================

Your description of Liberals is fantasy fare. Space does not permit an accurate rebuttal, but a list of Liberal descriptors may suffice. Liberals are loud, conniving, bullies who use obnoxious demands to get their way.

They lie routinely, misrepresent facts, and control media sources to propagandize their political positions. Liberals love power and employ dirty, underhanded control games to subjugate people that they deem inferior to themselves.

They disrespect our Constitution/ Bill of Rights and limit Constitutionally guaranteed RIGHTS by employing a "Death by a Thousand Cuts!"

Liberals are relentless in their steady destruction of American heritage and disrespect of American values. Liberal UTOPIA includes loss of our national sovereignty in favor of Global government, controlled by wealthy, powerful rulers who preside over the poor, disarmed and subjugated masses.

NEVER believe what a Liberal says! Know that they are stealing or misappropriating funds that they steward. Liberals never give power TO our people. They only take from us.

Flash

PS: I probably should have mentioned the high incidence of sexual perversion in Liberal masses. The stories of Pedophilila are so pervasive that it's hard to ignore.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Link to article?

 

[ROGER4314]

I searched through the Yahoo News articles and could not find the article in the current batch or in the inactive articles. Apparently, it was removed from the 'net.

Yup, it probably would have been a good idea to link to the article ........if our members could stand reading the thing!

Flash

 

[BooCocky]

Great write up flash. I don’t need to read the original article as I have read similar ones. Left wingers are pathetic to the core. I doubt I would have made it through the first paragraph anyway.

 

[ByrdMan]

Pretty accurate. Good job.

 

[easy rider]

Great description, although I would have added that liberals created political correctness in the guise of equality only to stifle people from freedom of speech.

 

[ROGER4314]

Good comments! Much appreciated!

Flash

 

[TheDan]

Here's the funny thing... the vast majority of the people calling themselves a liberal today do not meet the textbook definition. From Merriam-Webster:
Definition of liberalism

1. 1: the quality or state of being liberal
   
   
2. 2a often capitalized : a movement in modern Protestantism emphasizing intellectual liberty and the spiritual and ethical content of Christianityb : a theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom from restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard (see gold standard 1)c : a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy (see autonomy 2) of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties; specifically : such a philosophy that considers government as a crucial instrument for amelioration of social inequities (such as those involving race, gender, or class)d capitalized : the principles and policies of a Liberal (see 1liberal 6b) party
   

Per the above I'm a liberal, as were most of the founding fathers. The leftist progressives stole the word and twisted it's meaning just like they have done with so many things; most recently gender.

Leftists love to destroy the meaning of words because when we are not working from the same definitions it makes it impossible to have rational arguments. It's the only way their emotional manipulations can win. Let's not play into their game.

 

[easy rider]

Here's the funny thing... the vast majority of the people calling themselves a liberal today do not meet the textbook definition. From Merriam-Webster:
Definition of liberalism

1. 1: the quality or state of being liberal
   
   
2. 2a often capitalized : a movement in modern Protestantism emphasizing intellectual liberty and the spiritual and ethical content of Christianityb : a theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom from restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard (see gold standard 1)c : a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy (see autonomy 2) of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties; specifically : such a philosophy that considers government as a crucial instrument for amelioration of social inequities (such as those involving race, gender, or class)d capitalized : the principles and policies of a Liberal (see 1liberal 6b) party

Per the above I'm a liberal, as were most of the founding fathers. The leftist progressives stole the word and twisted it's meaning just like they have done with so many things; most recently gender.

Leftists love to destroy the meaning of words because when we are not working from the same definitions it makes it impossible to have rational arguments. It's the only way their emotional manipulations can win. Let's not play into their game.

As far as proper meanings of a term goes, you can say that about a socialist. A true socialist society never truly existed. When politics and power are involved nobody is truly who they claim to be. The term for Democrats and Republicans seem to have both done a 180 degree turn from what they started from.

 

[TheDan]

Definition of socialism

1. 1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
   
   
2. 2a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private propertyb : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
   
   
3. 3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

People tend to think that Marx invented or inspired socialism, but if you look at the pure definition and historical context, you can see that socialism has been around forever. The purist forms of socialism can be found in tribal societies. It should be clear that there is nothing "progressive" about socialism; it is regressive. Another twisting of meanings...

You can also see that from the definitions that liberalism and socialism are completely antithetical to each other as liberalism is supposed to be about individuals vs. the collective focus of socialism.

 

[easy rider]

Definition of socialism

1. 1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
   
   
2. 2a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private propertyb : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
   
   
3. 3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

People tend to think that Marx invented or inspired socialism, but if you look at the pure definition and historical context, you can see that socialism has been around forever. The purist forms of socialism can be found in tribal societies. It should be clear that there is nothing "progressive" about socialism; it is regressive. Another twisting of meanings...

You can also see that from the definitions that liberalism and socialism are completely antithetical to each other as liberalism is supposed to be about individuals vs. the collective focus of socialism.

Socialism in it's pure form is a kind of Utopia, in where all share in all. No socialist government followed in those practices. Utopia in my IMO would never work, it's in man's nature to better themselves.

 

[Kennydale]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[BRD@66]

Socialism in it's pure form is a kind of Utopia, in where all share in all.

That seems to be an apt description of the world of the Eloi - but not so much their counterpart, the Morlocks

 

[easy rider]

That seems to be an apt description of the world of the Eloi - but not so much their counterpart, the Morlocks

Yeah, Utopias aren't quite what they seem, even in books and movies...... LOL

 

[thequintessentialman]

Socialism is conservative. With its guarantee of equal outcome and no risk to the individual it epitomizes conservatism. Most of the principles of individual rights and freedoms you guys believe in are actually liberal/libertarian. For a quick tutorial, read the DoI, Constitution, and BoR. The notion that freedom was a birthright and not bestowed by government was as Liberal as it gets.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[benenglish]

I think most of us around here realize we are definitely classic Liberals (ETA: economic issues being a reasonable ground for disagreement) and definitely not Leftists. Personally, I get irritated at people who conflate the two.

What's funny is that most of us are also heavy-duty Socialists. You have a family? You put your family income in one pot and everybody gets what they need? That's pure Socialism and it works great.

It's just that Socialism doesn't scale past anything larger than a nuclear family.

 

[sdismukes]

The other issue with progressive ideas, given they believe they know best how we should live our lives, is that we should live our lives their way, <OR ELSE>. Everyone should have good health insurance. You must buy health insurance since it's good, or else (penalty). It's good to have free and open discourse but not to offend anyone. Your conversations must not contain certain words, or else (you will be charged with hate speech). Like that....

 

[TheDan]

What's funny is that most of us are also heavy-duty Socialists. You have a family? You put your family income in one pot and everybody gets what they need? That's pure Socialism and it works great.

It's just that Socialism doesn't scale past anything larger than a nuclear family.

I think that's why Socialism appeals to so many; it's actually a part of our nature. Cooperation and sharing are strong survival traits, and we all extend it towards our family first and then our extended tribe (be it biological or logical).

There's two very important things to note about that...
1) As this is done voluntarily there is no moral issue with it.
2) Since most of us do it naturally, then we don't need a government to enforce it.

 

[easy rider]

The only problem with socialism as it applies to governments is that it is followed with a form of fascism.

 

[sdismukes]

The only problem with socialism as it applies to governments is that it is followed with a form of fascism.

Like I said ... OR ELSE....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk