Why is "liberal" a dirty word?

Am I the only liberal who is actually proud to be called a liberal? Surely not?!

 

No idea.

 

It isn't?

It's only as dirty as conservative - which is only dirty to the liberals.

 

I once thought liberals are too conservative (as in the old Phil Ochs songs "Draft Dodger Rag" and "Love Me I'm A Liberal" which attack liberals from the left). But I'm truly a liberal in most of my views.

 

Just keep in mind that liberal like conservative and moderate can be subjective lables. This is why I prefer being an independent politically. I agree and disagree with all sides on something.

 

No, you are not alone. I am proud to be a liberal too. In fact, I'm a liberalsexual.

 

Because the conservative bias mainstream media has successfully changed the meaning of the word. I think this is a form of self hatred, because they know in 30 years they will be doing and saying the same things the liberals are doing and saying today and the liberals will still be 30 years ahead of them.

 

It's just as dirty as conservative in my honest opinion, both stand to funnel your tax dollars through government programs they deem necessary or moral.

 

Liberal is not simply a political term. It also refers to your values aside from politics.

 

Oh hell I use liberal more than I use bitch.


I mean I use it in combination I say liberal bitch or liberal bastard but in both insults I use the word liberal.

 

Because liberals today aren't liberals -- they're socialists.

 

That's very true.

But at the same time "liberal" has become a media buzz word. It's aimed at those who subscribe to "right wing" views, much like "conservative" is aimed at those with "left wing" views. It's all designed to create polarization with which to divide and conquer, so people fail to see that both sides are really the same, and that one could not exist without the other. After all, most so-called "conservatives" today aren't much less left wingers than their openly liberal counterparts. Liberalism has become socialism bordering on flat out marxism, while conservatism has become socialism bordering on Trotskyism.

"Liberal" is not any more of a "dirty word" to conservatives than the word "conservative" is to liberals. It's all about dividing people and getting them to argue amongst themselves, blind to their common enemy.

 

True, outside of North America a "liberal" is refered to by it's proper name: socialist.

"In New Zealand, Liberalism is not organized anymore. Liberalism nowadays refers to a support for individual liberties and limited government. The term is generally used with a reference to a particular policy area, e.g. "market liberalism" or "social liberalism". Unqualified liberalism is less common; in its extreme form it is known by the American term libertarianism. The left of centre New Zealand Democratic Party takes a more or less progressive liberal position in the spectrum, but lost popular support. ACT New Zealand is a classical liberal or libertarian party. (Main article: Liberalism in New Zealand). " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism_worldwide

It changes from country to country and region to region. in the U.S. "liberalism" is socialism and most americans don't like socialism, they prefer variations of "classical liberalism", though they rarely recieve it.

It's the "liberals" who change the word, no one else, if it's become "dirty" in the u.s., it's because it's been attatched to something dirty, socialism.

 

Uhhh, Liberalism is not Socialism in my country. Maybe in yours, but not in mine.

 

I said North America, last i checked Ontario was still in North America...
And if they advocate government intervention in the markets they're socialist.

 

No I have to dissagree here's the political platform, it's split into 6:

Fascist
Conservative
Liberal
Socialist
Communist
Hippie

 

That's the general consensus.

The way i see it:

Individualism
Collectivism

With variance of each.

It's not that i find it easier to split it into 2 than 6, 8, or 12, it just seeems to me that people keep renaming and relabeling the same 2 catagories and their hybrids when there is no real need to.

For the love of god or man, please don't add "hippie" as a political platform.

 

No, it's socialism in Canada, too. Even more so, actually. The average Canadian pays 46.5% of their wages in taxes of various kinds. This is according to the Canadian-based Fraser Institute.

 

It goes from right to left, so I am one of those that acknowledges Liberalism as central, however I think that you can't be central in politics because that basically means you're trying to please everyone which is what liberals do and it just contradicts everything.

Socialists make have some right wings issues but all in all they try to please the lower class.

And Communism is radical proposal of absolute equality, which in essence doesn't work.

And I put Hippie as in Anarchist, just that Hippies sounds funnier.

I think you can also figure out that from my perspective since I am a Fascist, the needle doesn't just go from right to left but from complete sanity and pure logic to insanity and pure illogic.

Fascism is the complete system, a government defined by law where the law is protected and those who go against the law are severely punished so as to deter further opposition to the law.

Conservatism is not as strict, it allows some citizens to step out of the line.

Liberalism is a huge slide, it attempts to control the populous by allowing the most " freedom " so as to avoid the most opposition but eventually this breaks down when some peoples " freedoms " conflict with one another.

Socialism attempts to convince people that everybody is in the same boat and that all should work together for a world where opposition is not needed because everyone has substantial finances and " freedoms " so as to create the idea that it's not worth opposing the government.

Communism, attempts to convince people that everyone is equal and therefore should be in equal strengths and privelages. This is already insanity in that logically this system could only work if a central flawless figure controlled the minds of all, something along the lines of a computer running everybody by brain chips, also for Communism to work there would have to be a sufficient abundance of resources and the population could not increase to the point of negative production, so reproduction would have to be controlled.

Anarchy/Hippie, the final edge of sanity, complete insanity, it can either work to the extent of everyone for themselves or everyone working for a negative production resulting in eventual human extinction, in either case there is no government and without a government there is no humanity.

 

Wow, that was an idiotic read... no offense.

If you look at fascism and communism, you see they are pretty much exactly the same. It's power consolidated in the hands of the state, which is in turn used to enslave the population. What difference was there between Hitler and Stalin, other than that Stalin killed more people. The outcome was identical -- death and enslavement for the people.