[PLUG-TALK] Liberal vs Conservative?
Jeme A Brelin
jeme at brelin.net
Fri Mar 29 02:07:40 UTC 2002
On Thu, 28 Mar 2002, Richard Langis wrote:
> The people on #orlug weren't very helpful, and google turned up a
> bunch of mirrored pages that said nothing, so I thought I'd ask this
> list.
>
> What is the definition of Liberal, and Conservative? Meant with
> regards to viewpoints, and with some examples.
>
> An example of sorts: Liberals are generally pro-choice, while
> Conservatives are generally pro-life.
>
> Any opinions out there?
I'll make my third and final recommendation for The New Machiavelli.
Here's the full text online:
<URL: http://www.literature.org/authors/wells-herbert-george/the-new-machiavelli/ >
Here's a quote from chapter 3:
<quote>
Every modern European state will have in some form or other these three
parties: the resistent, militant, authoritative, dull, and unsympathetic
party of establishment and success, the rich party; the confused,
sentimental, spasmodic, numerous party of the small, struggling, various,
undisciplined men, the poor man's party; and a third party sometimes
detaching itself from the second and sometimes reuniting with it, the
party of the altogether expropriated masses, the proletarians, Labour.
Change Conservative and Liberal to Republican and Democrat, for example,
and you have the conditions in the United States. The Crown or a dethroned
dynasty, the Established Church or a dispossessed church, nationalist
secessions, the personalities of party leaders, may break up, complicate,
and confuse the self-expression of these three necessary divisions in the
modern social drama, the analyst will make them out none the less for
that. . . .
</quote>
I would personally add, though, that the Republicans and the Democrats no
longer fill these roles in American politics. They've come to a kind of
unspoken agreement in the "Moderate" camp. They have essentially the same
views on labor, fiscal policy, the role of government and human rights,
but make mountains of the molehills that dot the landscape of
sensationalist politics in order to forge a distinction where there is
none.
I personally judge views and opinions outside the scope of their stated
affiliations with parties or movements based on their ultimate
effects. And for these veiws and opinions I have three
categories: Progressive, Regressive, Conservative.
I will admit freely that my idea of progress informs my use of the word
Progressive.
Progress: Increasing understanding, justice, peace, happiness, and
comfort for all living things.
Conservation: Maintaining the status quo.
Regress: Decreasing understanding, justice, peace, happiness or comfort
for any living thing.
Yeah, it's simplistic... but it has to be in order to be broad in scope
and application.
I guess that since my definition of progress includes work for the benefit
of the disenfranchised and poor as well as the wealthy and powerful, I'm a
Liberal. But I'm not going to let that name tie me to someone else's
beliefs... not for a second.
Personally, I oppose political parties and think they contribute to
laziness in society and in the minds of individuals.
J.
--
-----------------
Jeme A Brelin
jeme at brelin.net
-----------------
[cc] counter-copyright
http://www.openlaw.org
More information about the PLUG-talk
mailing list