What does being a "Liberal" mean? (US)
 

I remember what it was like. I was young and full of ideas--I knew the right answer for everything. There were policies that I believed would be best for the country, and for the human race. Many people didn't agree with these ideas, but that was because, you see, they were stupid. You know, studid, racist, Bible-thumpers.

And if they didn't want to go along with the progress of humanity, they would have to be dragged along kicking and screaming. And once all the obsolete oldtimers passed away, the rest of us could really get on with it. It was importnat to stand for things that needed to change. Old-fashioned ideas that weren't needed anymore.

I believed, at that time (although I never would have admitted to it in these terms, but the concept is unavoidable), that a legitimate use of the government would be to impose ideas on some people "for their own good" simply because the rest of us were so convinced that we had all the answers.

I don't believe that anymore.

I still believe it in some circumstances. And I think you do too.

Lookout gave the example of government tax breaks to promote home ownership. I think most people support that, and I think it's a correct use of the government.

But you can use even simpler and less controversial examples. The government wants citizens to not kill each other. So it will throw you in jail if you do.

Of course, you are thinking of people being forced to use compact fluorescent light bulbs, or something like that. You'll be able to come up with examples where the government maybe goes too far. It won't be hard.

Without a doubt, there is a whole, huge chunk of good things that have improved society through government intervention and regulation. We wouldn't even recognize our modern lifestyle without such concepts as, the meat you eat isn't rotten, that aspirin doesn't have poison in it, the shampoo isn't going to blind you, you have a 40-hour week with weekends off, etc. --all "progressive ideas" implemented for the good of the common man, and against the resistance of the forces of industry.

There is absolutely a point where our society updates its predominant concepts. We would be stuck in the stone ages otherwise!

I also think that these changes should have the blessing of the will of the people.

How do you feel about mandatory seat belt and helmet laws?

I'm personally against the laws, but wear the seat belt and helmet anyway (though there's no helmet law for motorcycles in Montana).

Maybe, when you can endanger others with your own stupidity, you shouldn't be allowed to? I think this falls under the expectation of relative safety that will exist when we step outside our front door.

Of course, you've easliy been able to position me into saying that smarter people should impose good ideas on stupider people.

Sometimes, yes. This is mostly gray areas, with very little that is well-defined.

I wouldnt define either liberalism or conservatism by their most extreme elements but rather by the broader consensus within their respective constituencies.

As to having the blessings of the will of the people (the majority), that should be balanced with protecting the rights of the minority.

Oh, excellent point. Very important to have that idea in there--that is fundamental to some of the expectations we have of our society.

Maybe I'm splitting hairs, but IDEAS don't get imposed on people, LAWS do. For example, a born-again Christian (who will soon disappear with the others in the rapture, thank god) has the idea that there should be a nativity scene in front of the courthouse, but the law prevents such displays. The born-again's idea remains unchanged, however.

I was a liberal until I turned into a cynic, now I just don't give a damn.

I know the feeling.

Liberal and Conservative are just tags people throw on themselves and others so that it is easier to categorize and dismiss the thoughts and ideas of others.

I believe the US government should act with fiscal responsibility. To do that they must not spend more than they take in and they must become debt free.

Does that make me a liberal or a conservative?

I believe the government should operate with the least possible interference with the daily lives of the citizens.

Does that make me a liberal or a conservative?

I believe personal responsibility for one's actions and the consequences should be the bedrock for a sound society.

Does that make me a liberal or a conservative?

Each of those statements can and should prompt several different responses. Those responses will be informed by what the individual believes is important and their interpretation of what the gray area in those statements should mean. Tags like liberal and conservative are just convenient ways to divide us so we don't take the time to realize we have more in common with our hardcore opposite than we do with those we've sent to Washington.

Now who has a vested interest in doing that?

Excellent post, LO.

Let me see if I can help you decide whether I'm liberal or conservative by adding a couple thoughts.
I think this needs to be accomplished by significantly cutting spending through a carefully calculated but painful process of eliminating government fraud, waste, and abuse. That will include elimination in every single government agency including the military. That will cost jobs. That will include elimination of programs that are no longer relevent, redundant, or simply a result of government sprawl.

I think this needs to be accomplished by increasing revenue to the treasury. I do not believe this can be accomplished by raising the marginal tax rate on any particular category because any category that has enough money to target also has enough money to manipulate the design, implementation, and enforcement of the tax system. A simple one page form with an easy to understand calculation should suffice for every individual, business, and church in America.

Now am I liberal or conservative?

I believe the government should only be involved in areas where they must.

I am free to be a complete moron so long as it does not endanger another. That means I have the freedom to not wear a seat belt because I have no expectation you will pay my medical bills.

I am free to wear a big ass .45 on my hip as I walk down the street (or carry it concealed) because that does not affect you. I am not free to withdraw that firearm from my holster in anything but a clear cut case of self defense without facing severe legal sanction because that does potentially endanger you.

I am free to put my penis in any consenting adult of legal age or any contraption rigged for my enjoyment regardless of what my neighbors might think because it doesn't affect them. I am not free to wave my willy at the neighbors, put it in their cat, or fornicate on a busstop bench because that affects others.

I am free to marry any consenting adult in a church wedding if the church is willing to perform and recognize the marriage. If I want that partnership to be recognized by the state I must fill out appropriate paperwork to complete my civil partnership, no church wedding required. I don't want the church involved in my government or my government involved in my church.

Now am I liberal or conservative?

I am free to pursue a life as a rock musician even though I'm really bad at it. I am not free to expect a subsidy because of my stupid decision.

I am free to pop out 0,2, or 22 children. I am not free to expect a subsidy for that.

I am free to be a poor employee, disrespect my boss, and take long lunch breaks. I am not free to expect I'll keep my job or to ask the government to help pay my bills when I lose it.

I am free to live anywhere I want even if I know there is no hope of employment. I am free to complain about my lack of opportunity. I am not free to expect you to do something about it.

Now am I liberal or conservative?

I think we need a new category to describe you Lookout. Something like Commie loving libertarian new new dealer? It's hard to say, not having all the facts, just yet.

As for point one, what is your position of Government subsidies and bailouts to "corporations too big to fail" vs the same for individuals "too small to matter"?

I would like to see the gifts (or lack thereof) applied equally.

And definitely no banging at the bus stop.

Im not sure he's a new dealer though.

but maybe a new new deal?