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.

 

I'm a Liberal!

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 12:26 AM
link   
When did liberal become such a bad word?

When I come on to ATS these days I feel like i've just walked into a Faux News talking points meeting, liberal being thrown at anyone who disagrees with anothers opinions. The Sarah Palin threads, the pro Bush threads, etc. ATS members really aren't denying ignorance lately.

I'm socially liberal and a fiscal conservative, people tend to lump all liberals in the same group therefore embracing ignorance. Everytime I see the this 'insult' tossed around it really bugs me, what has ATS become?

There are different types of liberals in the liberal spectrum, why must we lump them all together, that only divides us which is what TPTB wants, I say we create a new word for the liberal group that most people tend to associate the word with. Neo-Lib. It may exist but it needs to be put to use.

Our country was founded on liberal values, the purpose of Individual freedom, it wasn't meant to be divided into to groups with certain names, the key word here is INDIVIDUAL. If more people on ATS took a step back and look at the true definition of liberal I believe you would find you have a lot in common in the beliefs and are able to live your life the way you want because of liberal policies that have shaped this nation for the better.


[edit on 12/2/2009 by Uniceft17]




posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Uniceft17
When did liberal become such a bad word?


It was in the 80s, actually, during the Reagan years. Ronald Reagan's popularity, as well as his ability to live up to his nickname the Teflon President caused a major shift in American politics that hadn't been seen since FDR took office.

His presidency changed people from being ashamed of being a conservative to almost making the word liberal a curse word.

That it continues to this day is just a result of politics. If you look back through American history, this type of thing has taken place several times, and hopefully will take place many more times.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 12:41 AM
link   
You're also crazy!


Kidding of course, but you may want to make sure you got your
bulletproof vest on.
The peeps are well armed and pissed and they sure aint gonna be mad at bush!

Git rrr dun!

Maybe you'll get lucky and they'll just string ya up.
Either way, you have my support!
Lord knows ya got guts and I admire that!
Good luck son!
Star and Flag

Edit: you are supposed to conform to what others think is best for you

[edit on 2-12-2009 by dodadoom]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 12:41 AM
link   
I think that it has something to do with the american system of electing. All different types of liberals and conservatives are lumped together behind one man. I don't know, in reality, aka elections, they are lumped together so it's no surprise they are as well on these boards.
Just a thought.

It kind of reminds me of believing in Jesus yet still being lumped in with religious nutcases. anyways I liked the tone of your post it seemed more constructive than divisive



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by heyo
so it's no surprise they are as well on these boards.


It is very much surprising. Why are a vast amount of ATS users using the word liberal as an 'insult' on a board with the motto denying ignorance.

ATS's quality standard is going down the drain.

Thankyou for the kind words.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 12:49 AM
link   
Its quite anomalous how the Democrat party is not really liberal nor is the Republican party really conservative. It's seems they are both anti-you.
But it is an important distinction that party and ideology are not the same.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 12:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by heyo
I think that it has something to do with the american system of electing. All different types of liberals and conservatives are lumped together behind one man. I don't know, in reality, aka elections, they are lumped together so it's no surprise they are as well on these boards.
Just a thought.

It kind of reminds me of believing in Jesus yet still being lumped in with religious nutcases. anyways I liked the tone of your post it seemed more constructive than divisive


Very good points!
Ron Paul was an independant and when he realized he didn't stand a chance he became a republican.
Thats how sad our system is in a nut shell.

I have witnessed this blatant stereotyping and misguided hate many times myself. I will stop there. I agree, good post!



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 01:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Moonsouljah
Its quite anomalous how the Democrat party is not really liberal nor is the Republican party really conservative. It's seems they are both anti-you.
But it is an important distinction that party and ideology are not the same.


Yup.
They seem to take turns being the Neo-con/neo-lib whenever there party takes the White House. It's very orchestrated and all for show.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Uniceft17
 


I'm only talking about why people aren't seen as individuals. So since there are no people running under a 'center lib" AND 'extreme lib' campaign simultaneously, both are lumped in together into one group. Basically, you're going to get flack cause everyone knows that the guy who wants a bigger welfare cheque voted for the same guy you did, if we go by the generally accepted practices of liberal/conservative.

That being said, I agree with the above poster who said that nowadays, or since i've been alive even, the only consistancy shown from either side is that they'll do anything to get reelected, whether it's aligned with the ideals of those who voted for them or not.

I think it's a great example of tptb's understanding of human psychology.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 01:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by heyo
who wants a bigger welfare cheque voted for the same guy you did, if we go by the generally accepted practices of liberal/conservative.



That's exactly the ignorance that im trying to abolish. I don't support the wellfare service or any other public assistance program besides assiting the handicap and the elderly and homeless children. I'm a fiscal conservative not just a liberal, that's the message i'm trying to get across.

Liberal has been twisted by the right into a stigmatic word.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 01:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Uniceft17
 


Meh, if you study American history, this is a cycle that has taken place 4 other times in the past (5 if you include the Adams/Jefferson election), and it has always been the same result.

Though the two partied system is flawed, both parties respond quickly to effective third party candidates. It was seen in 1912 with Roosevelt, Taft and Wilson, it was seen in 1932, and it was seen in 1988. Though the press effectively kills any third party candidate from making headway, both parties recognize the desires of the people when a third party candidate gets a large number of votes and they both adjust. They became more progressive in 1912, more socialist in 1932, and more fiscally responsible in 1988.

To call the current parties new liberals and new conservatives would be like saying we lived in neoAmerica after the industrial revolution and neoneoAmerica after World War I and neoneoneoAmerica after after environmentalism, etc. The parties adjust to the times and the demands of the population. They're not idiots, and unfortunately they're not altruistic -- they're more interested in getting their party elected than they are the welfare of the country, but they know that, for some reason, those crazy Americans are concerned with the welfare of their country more than they are the welfare of one party or another (David Schippers III demonstrated this recently in turning from his lifelong party and pursuing what he perceived to be justice for America at their expense).



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 01:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Uniceft17
 


I understand you, but you and said example voting for the same person creates an inescapable correlation in people's minds. There is not enough time to follow you around and make sure you're a hard worker.Of course there are probably many other reasons but I think it's one of them.

So essentially, you're screwed, even though it's not your fault. It's just a natural thought process that is created. Similiar to a christian, for example, who is fiscally/socially conservative but is against war, he also is lumped in with the warmongers. Or one that sees a homosexual's sin as not being greater than his own; same lumpage.

Your whole conundrum seems inescapable imo. My question is, are there people behind the scenes making it like this? It's so genius i have to believe there's a driving force behind it.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by heyo
reply to post by Uniceft17
 


I understand you, but you and said example voting for the same person creates an inescapable correlation in people's minds.



Huh? Where did I say this?




Basically, you're going to get flack cause everyone knows that the guy who wants a bigger welfare cheque voted for the same guy you did


You also lost me there. I never said who I voted for, I vote independent (besides Ron Paul), the majority of Americans vote 2 party.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 09:42 PM
link   
The problem mostly lies in connotation and wrapping of term 'progressive' and 'socialist' and 'communist' into the liberal meaning. Also the fact that alot of the those people that claim to believe in those ideologies also wear the moniker 'liberal' and even some 'liberal democrat'. The same can be said with 'conservative', 'republican', 'neo-con', 'zionist' all being lumped in together. It is any easy way to label people, mostly used in politics but also in the media to polarize or illicit a proper negative response. To keep the people from seeing the truth behind the curtain and keep everyone hating and deriding each other as the downfall of the country or even the world. Divide and conquer, classic Sun Tzu.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Uniceft17
 



Liberal? Great! At least I know where you are coming from. The only thing worse than a liberal would be a moderate. They will stab you in the back in a second...uhhummmm...John McCain...cough...cough.

Being liberal is a real easy choice since it relys mainly on feelings, no real thought is involved at all. Being a moderate takes a little bit more work...moistening the finger to see which way the wind is blowing takes a little effort.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 10:11 PM
link   
The ideal would be to eliminate all dogmatic verbal systems. Fat chance. I don't really care for tacky cliche labels. I'll settle for Existential Aristotelian. I like that.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uniceft17
When did liberal become such a bad word?....

I'm socially liberal and a fiscal conservative, people tend to lump all liberals in the same group therefore embracing ignorance.

[edit on 12/2/2009 by Uniceft17]


So you're basically a libertarian. Liberal became a bad word when it was hijacked by people who expose regulation and affirmative action as the new versions of prosperity and equality.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join