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.

 

Conservative and liberal? Are these junk terms?

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 09:38 PM
link   
I have been puzzled for some time by the misleading terms of conservative and liberal, are they junk?

Perhaps we could hammer out some more precise terms that could supercede these terms that don't describe personal ideologies very well, if at all.

For conservative, I would say classical liberal which I had always thought was the implied meaning anyway but, that's clearly out the door. This could give big government social conservatives possession of the term that best summarizes their official position.

For liberal, progressive is the clear winner. This could allow individualists to reclaim the term as it was intended and give big government socialists a less misleading credo.

Individualist is a candidate for advocates of personal freedom and limited government. (but falling short of total anarchy).

Collectivist seems to be accurate for proponents of fairness and increased government (but falling short of totalitarian communism).

It has been pointed out that we have some compound phrases for some (but not all) variations such as social liberal/fiscal conservative but, I am really questioning whether someone who says that really means freedom through limited government. In most cases they just mean fairness legislation and balanced budgets which couldn't be further from the essential meaning of an individualist.

Naturally, there are grey areas in here but the idea is to make people think about throwing around these otherwise careless monikers.

I am not proposing a new polar system to supplant the previous incarnation but, rather I am suggesting that we expand the terminology to better identify our articles of faith in a meaningful way.

Clearly, I have some bias here because I am a red-blooded human with attitudes and experiences that have shaped my philosophy.

The question here is not which is the best arrangement for civilization. I am hoping for this to be a lexicological exploration. That said, don't hold back!
edit on 3-9-2013 by greencmp because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 10:29 PM
link   
As of now, Liberalism is progressive, for a fair chance to every human being, socialization of basic necessities that every human being needs and should have access.

Conservatism is going back to roots, no socialization of services whenever possible, pro capitalism, no monetary restrictions but, for most social restrictions that mirror their subjective opinions.

Liberalism is fueled by the hate brought by injustices and social distribution of resources...
while Conservatism is fueled by fear of change and egocentric usage of resources.

I feel that, in the world we live in as of now, we still need both ideologies in order to remain balanced.

But, as time progresses, if humanity wants to evolve past our little planet, we will have to think and work more as a society than focusing on individuality.
edit on 3-9-2013 by theMediator because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 10:50 PM
link   
Yes, they are junk terms. Neither embodies the principles it once did. Liberals aren't liberal, conservatives aren't conservative. It's just names for opposing herds of sheep.



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 11:46 PM
link   
Thanks for the input, I think your definitions reveal some of the hyperbole that I am interested in dissecting.


Originally posted by theMediator
As of now, Liberalism is progressive, for a fair chance to every human being, socialization of basic necessities that every human being needs and should have access.


This sounds a lot like collectivism.


Originally posted by theMediator
Conservatism is going back to roots, no socialization of services whenever possible, pro capitalism, no monetary restrictions but, for most social restrictions that mirror their subjective opinions.


This sounds like regressivism* which I would define as supporting the removal of certain government social services and behavioral restrictions while retaining (or reinstating) others selectively.

*new word!
edit on 4-9-2013 by greencmp because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2013 @ 11:54 PM
link   
They are junk terms. The questions...what are the benefits of labeling yourself or someone else a liberal or a conservative? Is there a real benefit?



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by amazing
 


Because the terms have been compromised, it is necessary to clarify the intent when they are used (pejoratively or complimentary) or better yet, use different more accurate terms.
edit on 4-9-2013 by greencmp because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by greencmp
 


I agree that those terms are faulty. I'm finding it hard to find a benefit in any political term though. They are too restrictive.



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 08:21 AM
link   
reply to post by greencmp
 


What I find strange is that the only place there is confusion about what is implied by labeling someone a “liberal” or “conservative” is on ATS. If I walk up to someone (anyone) on the street, they wouldn’t have a problem defining the current understood meaning of those terms.

Technically, I believe classical liberalism is closer to what you define as “individualist”.

Regardless, there is no sense in trying to redefine (or correct) the terms used today because they are not defined by one person. Right or wrong, these labels have been defined by our society collectively over decades. The only thing all of us REALLY need to understand is that no matter what someone in government claims to be, if they have an R or a D preceding their title, they are all on the same team…..and it isn’t our team.

edit on 4-9-2013 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 08:33 AM
link   
When I first started getting into politics both the republican and democrat parties were the most successful throughout the country. Both parties always associated with conservatism and liberalism respectfully. I the notice parties around the world use similar words and meanings. Like the conservative party in the U.K is the equivalent of the U.S republican party.

However, once I started to become aware that there is more then meets the eye. I feel terms like "conservative, liberal, progressive, etc." Are labels people use to express who they are and how the words are currently defined in society. To me no one looks at the historic deification and how it has been interpreted in various ways by all kinds of different people. Which would change the way people think about identifying themselves and politics all together.



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 08:41 AM
link   
reply to post by greencmp
 


I consider myself a conservative. I also believe that it is ok;
For gay folks to marry.
To legalise certain things already legal in Colorado and Washington.
To believe in Santa Claus, or whatever diety you wish to believe in.
To use our military accordingly. Not on a whim of a temporary leader.
To protest. To speak your mind.
To keep the money that you earn.
To not abort babies.
To carry a firearm.
To vote.
(Or not to vote.)
To secure our borders.





posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 08:46 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


First of all, love the signature!


Also, I would call this classical liberal or perhaps, constitutionalist.



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 08:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by greencmp
reply to post by beezzer
 


First of all, love the signature!


Also, I would call this classical liberal or perhaps, constitutionalist.


Most just call me an ###hole.


Wear a label, have someone slap one on you. . . . . .I guess the big picture-point is be true to your own beliefs and don't let any ideology sway you from your values and beliefs.



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


There is a point in correcting misconceptions with ideological terms. Mislabels marginalize people while simultaneously lumping up a very broad spectrum into two categories, stealing the voices of everyone who falls outside of the two.

You and I are perfect examples of people who lose their voice in allowing the misconceptions to stand.

Left-Wing | Right-Wing
Liberal Conservative
Democrat Republican

All the words in the left column are treated as synonyms as are all the words in the right column, I am not all of those 3 words in the left and you aren't all those 3 words on the right. Allowing these misconceptions to stand only serves to reinforce the two party system that we are both sick to death of.

OP: I appreciate your effort here but you may want to read a little more about ideologies, you still have some misconceptions. I don't have the energy for round 300,000 of this debate, sorry.



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 09:06 AM
link   
Going by my, self proclaimed, conservative family and friends on facebook...the definition of conservative is: Jesus, and lots of him, guns...as many as you can get your hands on, searing hatred of President Obama that goes beyond his policies, lots of beer and lots of hunting. They've become stereotypes of themselves. The self proclaimed liberals hate Monsanto, participated in occupy, oppose the keystone pipeline and watch ancient aliens on tv. They don't have any guns, drink less beer, my or may not be religious, but never post anything about Jesus, if they proclaim to hate anyone, it's usually not a politician but a pundit on tv or radio...they don't hunt. Hmmmm
edit on 4-9-2013 by amazing because: (no reason given)


Sorry if this post seems a little biased against the right...this was just based on the Facebook posts and we all know that people are much more than their Facebook posts. Just an observation.
edit on 4-9-2013 by amazing because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by amazing
 


I laughed out loud reading this. It's ironic how politics has become in America. Everyone represents a stereotype instead of wanting bring any real meaning into the world.



posted on Sep, 4 2013 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 


Thanks for your contribution!

Naturally, I must have some preconceived notions that are incongruous with popular definitions, as do we all.

My goal here is to pour them on the table and sort them in the light of day. It isn't easy, it could be constructive and it won't ever be complete.

Let us play with semantic legos!




top topics



 
5

log in

join