|
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
|
The thing is, Fir3start3r, if you want to believe that the argument is just a Liberal vs Conservative one - well, I'll just say you could very well go to your grave trying to figure it out because that's not where the focus of the argument should be.
Here's a few snippets taken from Wikipedia:
| quote: | In modern Western countries, the political spectrum usually is described along left-right lines. This traditional political spectrum is defined along an axis with conservatism, theocracy, and fascism ("the Right") on one end, and socialism, communism, ("the Left") on the other. National and cultural differences in the use of the terms left and right are common. In Europe (excluding Britain) liberalism is generally assigned to the center-right, and the European liberal parties are primarily free market liberals. In North America, liberal refers almost exclusively to new liberalism or social liberalism, and is generally assigned to the center-left (see Liberalism in America). However, the right in the United States, which self-identifies as 'conservative', is heavily influenced by classical European liberalism, especially the emphasis in classic British liberalism on the rights of the individual versus the state. Hostility toward the U.S. federal government, as a perceived threat to individual liberty, is found among both "liberals" and "conservatives".
Similarly, in China, left and right have referred to different positions at different times, although the issues were often very different from those in Western nations. |
| quote: | Etymology
The word "liberal" derives from the Latin "liber" ("free") and all liberals present themselves as friends of freedom.
...
The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) indicates that the word liberal has long been in the English language with the meanings of "befitting free men, noble, generous" as in liberal arts; also with the meaning "free from restraint in speech or action", as in liberal with the purse, or liberal tongue, usually as a term of reproach but, beginning 1776–88 imbued with a more favorable sense by Edward Gibbon and others to mean "free from prejudice, tolerant."
...
The first English language use to mean "tending in favor of freedom and democracy" according to the OED dates from about 1801 and comes from the French libéral, "originally applied in English by its opponents (often in Fr. form and with suggestions of foreign lawlessness)". They give early English language citation, "1801 Hel. M. WILLIAMS, Sk. Fr. Rep. I. xi. 113," presumably Helen Maria Williams, Sketches of the State of Manners and Opinions in the French Republic: "The extinction of every vestige of freedom, and of every liberal idea with which they are associated."
The editors of the Spanish Constitution of 1812, drafted in that year in Cádiz, may have been the first to use the word liberal in a political sense as a noun. They named themselves the Liberales, to state that they opposed the absolutist power of the Spanish monarchy.
|
| quote: | Usage of the word liberalism
The word liberalism has several different, but generally related, political meanings. In its original political meaning, the term "liberal" refers to a political philosophy, founded on the principles of the Enlightenment and to a lesser extent the Idealist parts of the Romantic, that tries to circumscribe the limits of political power and to define and support individual rights. In the present, a variety of ideologies attempt to claim the mantle of 19th century liberalism, from American liberalism to libertarianism to social-liberalism.
Liberals throughout the world understand liberalism as embracing a tradition rooted in the Enlightenment, the American War of Independence, the more moderate bourgeois elements of the French Revolution, and the European Revolutions of 1848, with philosophical roots going back to the Renaissance traditions of empiricism (Sir Francis Bacon), humanism (Erasmus), and pragmatism (Niccolò Machiavelli).
The original Enlightenment thinkers, such as John Locke and Baron de Montesquieu, attempted to establish limits on existing political powers by asserting that there were natural rights and fundamental laws of governance that not even kings could overstep without becoming tyrants. This was combined with the idea that commercial freedom would best benefit the whole of the political order, an idea that would later be associated with the advocacy of capitalism, and which was drawn from the works of Adam Smith and David Ricardo. The next important piece of the triad of ideas of liberalism, was the idea of popular self-determination. Most liberals support a combination of these ideas, although many would ascribe more importance to one of them than to the other two. |
| quote: | Liberalism today
Political positions
A caveat is in order: as with any other political philosophy, an abstract explanation of liberalism refers to an ideal. In practice, politicians make pragmatic compromises (see centrism), have personal interests, and may pander to voters, so that the ideal is never a perfect description of any one individual's politics. Further, as with any other political philosophy, liberalism in any of its forms is defined somewhat differently by its proponents and its opponents. Those who adhere precisely to a well-defined set of principles are often those who are far removed from contention for political power. That said, the policies of liberal parties are always more or less based on the right to self determination of the individual, and the reciprocal responsibility of the state to protect and promote the individual citizens which make it up.
In general, liberals favor constitutional government, representative democracy and the rule of law. Liberals at various times have embraced both constitutional monarchy and republican government. They are generally opposed to any but the milder forms of nationalism, and usually stand in contrast to conservatives by their broader tolerance and in more readily embracing multiculturalism. Furthermore, they generally favor human rights and civil liberties, especially freedom of speech and freedom of the press (while disagreeing on the degree to which people have the right of economic wellbeing). However, the liberal commitment to unrestricted individual liberty is not necessarily absolute: as Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. said, "The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre…," and liberal parties support restrictions on incitement to violence. In the penal system, liberals in most countries oppose capital punishment.
Liberals believe in a free market and free trade, but they differ in the degree of limited government intervention in the economy which they advocate. In general, government responsibility for health, education and alleviating poverty fits into the policies of most liberal parties. But virtually all of them tend to believe in a far smaller role for the state than would be supported by most social democrats, let alone socialists or communists. |
Anyway, I hope that one day you may better understand the endless circle in which you're arguing by trotting that old, worn, Liberal vs. Conservative line. It's just ignorant in light of the fact that world politics are rough-hewn from a never ending pallete of contiguous, but assorted hues. (It's far from being black and white, or Liberal vs Conservative.)
___________________
| quote: | "Learn, child, to catch a hint through whatever agency it may be given. 'Sermons may be preached through stones."
- Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, Letters from the Masters of Wisdom, first series, p. 74, letter 31 |
|
