Hello all! My first visit and post in a very long time. Very few of you probably know me now. Lots of turnover, I guess. Just took a quick look and couldn't resist the topic title.
I think I'm the first American to post on this topic, so I'll offer from that POV. But I'm aware what I have to offer is probably not new to anyone ... I'm not outside the States looking in, like the posters on this thread, but I'd guess our culture is so much "out in the world" that you probably know a lot more about Am politics than I know about yours. And I'm not saying that's a good thing.
Having read the posts so far, I've learned enough to see that political parties and gov'ts in other countries are VERY different than in America, which is why I have so much trouble understanding BBC World News on our public TV.
Since I can't comment on the British, Scottish, and other European politics here thusfar, I'll have to refer to the original post from my neighbor to the north.
Originally posted by Maj
What are your definitions for a liberal (or liberalism) and a conservative (or conservativism)? And if your definition does not already include it, what are your gripes with both or one of these ideologies?
Over here (from my POV, of course), there are really only Democrats (usually liberals) and Republicans (usually conservatives). The liberals are considered Left, the conservatives are considered Right. (When compared to the above posts, this shows how relative everything really is.) I would count myself as a liberal, maybe more towards the center on a few things, but I don't count myself as a Democrat. I think both parties screw things up and I think only two parties in power are too few, so I'm registered "Independent" or "non-affiliated". I also believe people ought to vote their conscience on every issue at hand, instead of "with the party line".
I see liberals as having more, well, liberal interpretations of things, and likewise, conservatives having stricter interpretations. Liberals believe our ills are caused more by social conditions and that in many ways we are our brothers' keepers ... in our case that Federal government should be an instrument that ties and pools this country together and takes care of everyone in multiple ways. Conservatives believe our ills are caused more by gov't restrictions and not enough economic freedom and that everyone should take care of themselves (and immediate families) and if you're not in a good place then that's your own fault and don't ask me to pay for it ... and that the Fed gov't should stay out of nearly everything and leave almost all governing to the States and locales.
The archtypal liberal is the long-haired, tie-dyed, social-activist, vegetarian hippie from the mid-60s. I see 2 archtypes for conservatives: the neatly-shaved, dark-suited business man with 2.3 kids and the wife cooking in the kitchen of their single-family home ... AND ... the jeans-clad, Marlboro-smoking cowboy or farmer, complete with boots, hat and gunrack on the back of the pickup truck. The only reason Bush won is because the latter of these vote and have an easier time doing so and the more downtrodden cannot, do no, or many times are prevented from voting, either directly or indirectly.
For me, my classification comes from my spirituality ... I believe that we are all connected, that we are all one but seeming separate ... that we are made from the same stuff, infused with the same spirit and are ultimately part of the same entity or "God", though we call It by differing names and have differing beliefs about what It is across our world.
From this belief, I view us as inextricably connected with our environment ... and I mean the one you see from space, not the one with artificial lines and territories in varying shades of pink, yellow, orange, green, etc. This lumps me in with the liberals because I believe more in protecting the environment than in tapping it's resources (without at least giving back to it EQUALLY).
On the political scene, this makes me favor putting 5 years of apolitical (non-oil company controlled) effort into researching alternative power technologies and making them mainstream, instead of drilling for even more oil in untouched parts of our countries, which will take 5 years to see any results anyway ... and even then, we've only bought a little time because it WILL run out someday and we'll end up HAVING to research those technologies from a point of weakness (without the oil to move around) instead of strength. This also has me purchase and use an electric lawn mower for my yard, simply because the emissions from 1 hour of gas-powered mowing is as much emissions as a drive from Baltimore to Connecticut (that's a long way).
From the view that we are all one, I feel we ought to take care of each other and that we hurt ourselves when we do not. So I cannot view the troubled who commit crime as having their own problems they have to work out behind bars ... I view them as people who need help so they have no desire to commit crime, benefiting us all. Conservatives would rather focus on enforcement and punishment AFTER the crimes are commited, than the sources of the problems so there is very little need for enforcement and punishment at all. Conservatives say spending "their" money on education and social programs is a waste for them ... but think of what can be saved for everyone (not only in money, but in time and grief) if there was no need to have large police forces and we wouldn't have to pay nearly as much for jails and keeping large numbers of people in them. Of course, the conservative view on saving money on jails is simply to kill more prisoners and have them out of our way ... my philosophy doesn't allow for that ... and since I believe "what goes around, comes around" I have to consider it's effect if it happened to me or a member of my family before I could get behind it.
I personally view liberals as more consistent and conservatives as inconsistent. Liberals would want more money pooled together centrally to be able to run all schools as top-notch and have many social programs to help those who aren't raised well and just can't seem to cope civilly in life without help. If liberals had enough money available so we weren't forced to choose between these things, we would also support more money for the military to keep is safe from those who would want to hurt or destroy us. But as it is, we tug of war with the conservatives for how much money the gov't gets and where the money goes. Funny thing is, conservatives what to control the gov't by saying they want less of it, then it ends up expanding under them anyway.
Yes, conservatives want "less gov't control" over our lives. The Federal gov't should only maintain the cross-country highway system and the military ... oh, and control a woman's right to choose an abortion ... oh, and to spend Federal dollars prosecuting a man for having sex with an intern while members of their own party had to step down due to such affairs. I could go on.
Liberals see private industry as money-hungry entities with high-priced, high-powered lobbyists paying people off to get laws that only impact their profit margin positively. Conservatives see private industry as the place all our money and management should go, as if they do it any better than the gov't and as if those dollars will "trickle-down" to the working people at all. But what we see are industries that cut as many corners as possible to make a bigger profit, thus producing an inferior product (e.g., airline security companies) and that profit stays at the good-ole-boy CEO level, not converted into raises for effective workers.
Personally, I think anything our country can't do without should be centralized and Federalized, or at least have very clear and enforced gov't controls that benefit the PEOPLE, not the industries. If we the people, who the Fed gov't represents, are going to be asked to bail out the airlines anyway, because our country can't run without them, then I think we ought to either 1) take them over (like, make them another branch of the military) or 2) actually put enough into checking over their shoulders to make sure they are complying with federal guidelines. I see LESS federal control in general as a mistake ... then businesses do whatever they want (consumer be damned) and beg for handouts anyway, either formally, in time of crisis, or covertly, with payoffs buried in a bill the people will end up paying for anyway. I mean, why worry about serving the customer to stay profitable when you can lobby the gov't to have you pay less in taxes than your employees do? I think of all the money we could have in the gov't to do better things just by making everyone (esp. businesses) pay fairly, and by controlling wasted spending by lawmakers for political gain ... it's a shame.
I see liberals wanting fairness ... make business pay the same level of taxes and the same in property rights as an citizen would ... give the unfortunate the things that others have but that they are not able to get on their own. I see conservatives as wanting fairness when it benefits them ... make them people pay for this obscure condition in this spending bill and only benefits my state and my ability to get re-elected ... give this industry a huge tax break because their lobbyist just financed my re-election campaign ... then either the people will have to pay more (but a conversative supports LESS taxes ... hmmm) or that useless social program, yeah that one called the public school system, can be dropped.
Lastly, my political views were solidified at a critical point in our history. I had mostly been apolitical, not paying it much attention at all. So my views came only from what I heard ... that gov't was simply corrupt and no good ... Democrats tax & spend and waste our money ... Republicans want lower taxes and less gov't "intrusion". Then I observed what happened after a Congress that was controlled by Democrats almost all my life was suddenly controlled by the Republicans (1994?). I saw a good-ole-boys party ... high-fiving their new found control. I heard them speak so poorly and derisively about their fellow Congressmen (and women), like nothing I ever heard before. I heard them speak as if they were right about everything. I saw them deadlock the entire process and shut down the gov't more than once, hurting the people who spend their lives serving the gov't (i.e., the people), only to try and make a Democratic president look bad. I saw them searching for every fight and scandal they could until they came up with the motherlode: a president in an affair (like that's never happened before) ... and I saw them make the hugest deal about that and everything bad about our President that they could ... and ONLY for political gain.
Meanwhile, I observed a Democratic president, who was only human, and who managed to pulloff one of the most responsible and sensible things any person could be asked to do: balance the people's budget (which, unbelievably, is not required), after years of over-spending. After all this, my mind was made up about who was who in politics. And even since, I've lived through good economic times with the 1st surpluses in years, only to have a conservative take over, give a bunch of money back to the people, and now we're facing deficits and passing an unbalanced budget again.
My conclusion: Most conservative politicians only want political gain, and their leadership will attempt to hurt anyone to attain it. At least some liberal politicians actually want to make a difference in this world. Who do you think I tend to vote for?
OK, enough for one rant. That's just my view. Inside my opinion, I'm sure you can find plenty that distinguishes a conservative from a liberal ... at least in America.
Spiff
