Thread: Please define "liberal"

Originally Posted by Milkman

You are very poorly read.

A wanna-be Ann Coulter.

What I said is right up the Robert Bork alley ... you showed your poorly read ass with that one

Originally Posted by stroller

The annoying thing is, it's used in an almost derogatory and generalising manner to avoid responding to arguments with reason by some conservy-yanks, yet they refuse to expand on the meaning of the term.

I'm happy to hear you feel that way. And it's weak of you to throw stones at me in such a transparent fashion. I expanded on my version of the word earlier in this thread.

I strongly recommend you post in a little less trollish fashion blokester.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

That's impossible for sTroll to do as since day one on TV when he started to stir shit he's the #1 Troller I've encountered online...

I wish I could support you on this one ... but I've encountered far worse trolls over on the wannabee teacher forum. Stroller is rather kind in my book compared to alot of others.

(It kills me to support stoller by the way?

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

Originally Posted by stroller

The annoying thing is, it's used in an almost derogatory and generalising manner to avoid responding to arguments with reason by some conservy-yanks, yet they refuse to expand on the meaning of the term.

I'm happy to hear you feel that way. And it's weak of you to throw stones at me in such a transparent fashion. I expanded on my version of the word earlier in this thread.

I strongly recommend you post in a little less trollish fashion blokester.

Nope, stroll is right on the mark. As usual, you can't face the truth and revert to denial.

"Margaret Snyder compares American "liberalism" with Communism and Fascism and concludes: "So it is that liberalism has taken away the self-respect of whole classes of people. It has done so by the same elitist mentality that characterized the two vilest socialisms of the twentieth century. Most people who consider themselves liberals consider their motives to be pure, and I don't doubt that they are. But by their attitudes and policies, they encourage dependency on the state and ultimately do much more harm than good."

http://www.opinioneditorials.com/gue..._20030924.html

The article above demonstrates the thoughtlessness with which the term 'liberal' is used very well.

Talk about communism, fascism et al, without any understanding of these, and pulling 'liberalism' into the equation without as much as taking a breath and contemplating at least the very obvious contradiction implied in the words themselves.

Originally Posted by stroller

The article above demonstrates the thoughtlessness with which the term 'liberal' is used very well.

Talk about communism, fascism et al, without any understanding of these, and pulling 'liberalism' into the equation without as much as taking a breath and contemplating at least the very obvious contradiction implied in the words themselves.

What goes around comes around. Not much thought goes into liberals and their misguided attempts at framing the GWB as Nazis.

A stinkin' fokin' Liberal don't want to drill in Alaska of Florida or California either because it might disturb a moose or a spotted owl or some such shit...

^
I wouldn't mind if SK, or someone else who frequently labels others as "liberals", had made an attempt to define the term.

Instead the thread is cluttered with the usual mix of snide comments and 'funny' pics posted by the usual suspects.

^ I prefer the term collectivists or pinko communists if we had to choose silly non-sense labelling.

So SK, can you call us "pinko-commie bastards" instead of "liberals" ? you would make more sense if that gives you a clue

^ What's funny and hilarious at the same time, is that Communists and liberal democratists are quite opposite in every realm.


Ask SK to Adam Smith, Friedman, Dixit, AND......Marx and Engels.....


All would be new to him!


He's never even dabbled to post liberal democratic philosophy and policy vs. Marx and Engels.

Should start a few topics on different Philosophers who influenced history.

^^ Progressist are not socialists, they are humanists. Very different. They believe that we as individuals should be the center of attention in society, not corporations or business.

Originally Posted by Milkman

^ What's funny and hilarious at the same time, is that Communists and liberal democratists are quite opposite in every realm.


Ask SK to Adam Smith, Friedman, Dixit, AND......Marx and Engels.....


All would be new to him!


He's never even dabbled to post liberal democratic philosophy and policy vs. Marx and Engels.

Sez the man who writes in bullet format. You ain't smart enough to think for yourself ... your posting style reveals a person steals snippets and posts them as his own.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

^^ Progressist are not socialists, they are humanists. Very different. They believe that we as individuals should be the center of attention in society, not corporations or business.

Humanism is a wide area, it includes religion as well as some forms of socialism, I don't see the contradiction there.
But, as I mentioned before, I am not familiar enough with politics in the US to comment further.


Btw, Storekeeper, another slow day at the office with more rambling posting in "Issues"?

^ no contradiction, even though socialists have a long tradition to ignore religion. Progressists (at least the Euro version) is a subgroup of Humanists.

Progressists are closer to socialists than Euro-Liberals. There is a strong protestant presence in that group if I remember correctly. Socialism in general doesn't negate the role of religion, it just doesn't want religion to rule everything. Under socialism, there is a respect for all kind of religious beliefs.

In Germany, social democrats are probably the closer to progressists. Btw, can't remember, which one is the right over there ? Christian democrats ? Master stroll, please refresh our memory

Originally Posted by stroller

Humanism is a wide area, it includes religion as well as some forms of socialism, I don't see the contradiction there.

Why don't you expound on what you think you know about humanism ?

I wanna thank Snaffie for his recent positive comments. And I like the way he is maintaining his beliefs and positions while distancing himself from the likes of stroller and butterfluffy. Long live the Bremeloes and Silver Whales

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

I wanna thank Snaffie for his recent positive comments. And I like the way he is maintaining his beliefs and positions while distancing himself from the likes of stroller and butterfluffy. Long live the Bremeloes and Silver Whales

And I even sent SK a green, yesterday.

I do not take anything on forums personal. But at times, in the heat of debate and disagreement things sometimes seem to be that way.

I am trying to focus on the issue we're talking about. Not always easy for me to do, but I am trying to.

Liberalism? Are you talking about classical liberalism ? Contemporary liberalism ? Modern liberalism ? Are you talking about liberalism in regards to politics ? Religion ? Economical liberalism ? Some bright guy or gal please be specific here.