It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: SurveyTheSurveyors
The problem with politics is that its starting to turn into a sport for the populace. Left or right up or down, which ever side you may fall on, the opposite side MUST be your opponent, right? I only see right from wrong, not right from left...
-StS
originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Lumenari
Unfortunately Conservative and Liberal.
These are just ideas that humans have.
They do not represent what humans are.
No mater what we call ourselves we can never truly be any one idea.
We are just to complected as a species.
originally posted by: SurveyTheSurveyors
a reply to: Lumenari
I wish we could. Unfortunately I don't see it ever happening. The pure mind, loving soul, and the selfless heart has all been corrupted to the point of no return. There's too many issues people have at hand to take a side on, whether it be religion, sexuality, racism, politics, guns... The list goes on and on, and that's not a good thing.
I pray for all my enemies, allies, friends, and family. Who am I praying to? Sometimes unsure, but positive thoughts are what we need more than ever... you don't have to be religious to manifest positivity
-StS
originally posted by: Lumenari
originally posted by: Mach2
I think a majority of ppl , regardless of how they are labeled, are centrists.
They may have leanings both ways on different issues. I, for example, am for small, unobtrusive, financially responsible government. A clearly Republican stance. I don't want religion in schools. A fairly liberal stance. I want a strong military, without nation building. Don't know where that puts me. I don't want a permanent welfare class, but believe in helping poor ppl to a better life. I want control of our borders.
To me these all seem like common sense, but there are those that would disagree with every one of those views.
I'm all for all of that.
However, tell me the last time a Republican-led government shrunk the Federal government.
It was Calvin Coolidge in 1923.
For the record, he came into office and HALVED the size of the Federal government in a week.
Imagine that happening today?
Here's something else to imagine:
Prior to the Great Depression and the bloated bureaucracy created by the Great Society, the Federal government was smaller than the average State government.
Even the Progressives of the early 1900's didn't accomplish federal overreach that we have today.
-- David Rockefeller, Speaking at the June, 1991 Bilderberger meeting in Baden, Germany (a meeting also attended by then-Governor Bill Clinton and by Dan Quayle--
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time
Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended
our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost
forty years."
"It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world
if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years.
But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a
world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite
and world bankers is surely preferable to the national
auto-determination practiced in past centuries."
by: David Rockefeller (1915- ) Internationalist billionaire, CFR kingpin, founder of the Trilateralist Commission, World Order Godfather
Date: June 1991 Baden, Germany
Source: Bilderberger Meeting, Baden, Germany
originally posted by: toms54
a reply to: Lumenari
Yea, I have to take issue with those dictionary definitions. Nearly every post so far has given a truer definition of at least some aspects of the question.
These terms really mean whatever the people describing themselves as such say they mean. The meaning of conservative has changed quite a bit over the last 20 years. Sometimes what was liberal yesterday is conservative today and vice versa. Progressive seems to denote progress toward Marxism.
Our current system of government doesn't seem to address the powers and forces that currently drive our government policy. Corruption has caused all sides to betray their stated principles. Even if it is possible to have a president that can't be bought off, it makes little difference if everyone else in the government is. When all sides must constantly raise funds all the time, they all start to look the same to me.
originally posted by: Iscool
a reply to: Lumenari
Progressivism is communism...They just stuck a nicer name on it...Repackaged it...
originally posted by: Nickn3
I feel like that between 1962 and 1975 both the demacrats and republicans seem to change sides. And both sides were destroyed by by the progressives in the 80's.
originally posted by: Lumenari
originally posted by: Nickn3
I feel like that between 1962 and 1975 both the demacrats and republicans seem to change sides. And both sides were destroyed by by the progressives in the 80's.
You are right. The Neo-conservatives that originated in the Democratic party were forced out by the Progressives in the 60's and went to the Republican party. Their power peaked in 1990-2000 and then were pushed into oblivion by more Progressives coming into the Republican party.
The current sea change in the Republican party was started as the Tea Party in 2007. Actual conservatives starting to take back some ground, as it were. As for whether they shall continue to grow as political sentiment on the right grows increasingly conservative one can only hope.
I would love to see the same movement on the Democratic side.