Political labels are seemingly meaningless in a modern political dialogue. First, not only do people misuse the terms... but people who follow these
labels lie all the time about what they say they're for or not for. For a shift in thought to occur about how to correct this- the labels should be
used in their original form... not their convoluted form that they are today. That would require a lot of persuasion from those in denial about the
use of those labels. I'm not saying that labels are all meaningless. I am a classical liberal myself. Ideas however- are more important than the
labels behind them. Let me explain briefly what I mean about the labels being meaningless in a modern political dialogue first.
My five main points:
(1) The term reactionary is useless. Reactionary used to refer to someone who was well I'll just say it- a bigot...
). Couldn't you also say that modern liberals are reactionaries too? Their economic policies seem to show
that they don't want to let go of the past. Modern conservatives also have their own form of economic intervention too.
(2) Conservatives in the past used to hate freedom and progress. I'm not trolling conservatives here. Conservatives have always against
Democracies. That is- traditional conservatives. Most of the people who think they're conservatives (except the whacky religious right) really
aren't. They're not elitists. They're not aristocrats. They may have not hated freedom and progress- but they certainly didn't want progress.
One such staunch conservative was Edmund Burke (en.wikipedia.org...
)- a strong opponent of the French revolution. He wanted no
change. People who go around saying everything fine- the "whacky conservatives" follow his philosophy. People who advocate for less economic
intervention- are really just suckers... because they vote for a political party which doesn't really want that. They want it for the corporations.
They want big government for the people they like (http://w(ww.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/corporatism.htm).
(3) Liberals today say they're for freedom and equality. The programs they create are all about systems of control. What Modern Democrats advocate
for is something like total information awareness of all economic transactions. They may not want to control everything but they sure don't hide the
fact that they want control. Modern liberals are proponents of a central banking system that is which creates disasters time and time again and
modern liberals will never realize that the system they're proposing is very much like statism(www.thefreedictionary.com...
will deny that we live in a statist society. They will say we have free-markets all they can. However, manipulating the markets via the federal
reserve via interest rates is akin to a centrally planned economy. A centrally planned economy... is certainly the one modern liberals are advocating
for when they call for more regulations on the economy to slow "capitalism down". Which brings me to another point. They may be right that
they're for equality. Advocating for a centrally planned economy- is something different (that's not freedom). This is just more proof about how
misused the labels are these days.
(4) Capitalism is widely misunderstood. So is socialism. People think of socialism- well modern librealsperhaps think socialism is something that
will lead to equality. They think socialism is good- that it will lead to collective equality
). However if put into practice socialism would probably always lead to a totalitarian
form of government. On the other hand, people think capitalism is evil because that's what Republicans always say. They think that capitalism is
for redistribution of wealth and for the few to rule over the many. That may have some truth to it but there is some difference between what
capitalism is typically understood for today and what it really is.
Our economy runs on a system essentially of Keynisian economics- where we're always lead to believe that the federal reserve will help the economy,
and, that booms and bust are the natural faults of capitalism (which they very well may be). However, what people think is that because the
free-market has faults, that, the government must step into rescue it. The federal reserve is very much involved in creating these problems... and
also if a market were to correct itself naturally it must do so without outside intervention. Capitalism is a system where people trade freely and
people can interact with each other freely. Capitalism isn't itself evil. You'll find evil people in socialism and in capitalism. The capitalism
or laissez-fair ideology aren't necessarily evil.
(5) The two political parties call themselves Democrats or Republicans. An economic modern liberal is hardly for a Democracy- in the free sense, that
is, they don't want people to have too much freedom. While at the other hand on the spectrum you have your Republicans who say they're for limited
government like what John Locke proposed (en.wikipedia.org...
). It's laughable how far the terms have shifted from their
original meaning really. Democrats can say they're for Democracy all they want. Republicans can say they're for limited government all they want.
Or that they're for a Republican form of government and that they follow the constitution. That doesn't make it true. Just because you say
something over and over doesn't mean that it's true. I thought they should have learned that by now.
I think ideas have went too far from their original meaning. People need to start using the words with how they traditionally meant to mean. People
shouldn't just use words to smear one another. Rather I encourage rational thinking about different ideas and putting together different thoughts
about different theories that different people put forth. People- just don't want to let go of these labels. They would rather be a sheep than to
think for themselves. Labels have gotten so far from their original meaning that I would recommend to those that insist on misusing these labels to
stop using them. It's unhealthy to keep attaching labels to meanings when they contradict each other so much of the time that they don't make much
logical sense when you think things through a bit.
[edit on 10-10-2009 by Frankidealist35]