Conservative? Liberal? How About Conservative Liberalism?

As most people know, I am a huge fan of politics on ATS and it is one of the main reasons why I joined this site. Lately the political forums have been alive more than ever with threads that allows me to engage my fellow members in the throes of civil discourse.

Lately I have been labeled a specific term that I never thought would apply to my political ideology.....Liberal.

I always thought that I was a conservative-minded individual that espoused the principles of liberty, free market capitalism and smaller government, so being called a liberal was somewhat of a shock to the system.

Well, then I looked at my handy-dandy online dictionary and this is what is says about the word liberal.

1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. ( often initial capital letter ) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.

As a Republican...that doesn't sad too bad. I believe that any and all societies have to be able to "flex" as the people change and evolve towards a better society. But that's just a quick definition...let's see what they say about Liberalism as it applies politically.

Liberalism in the United States is a broad political philosophy centered on the unalienable rights of the individual. The fundamental liberal ideals of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion for all belief systems, and the separation of church and state, right to due process and equality under the law are widely accepted as a common foundation across the spectrum of liberal thought. The main focus of modern liberalism in the United States includes issues such as voting rights for all adult citizens, equal rights, protection of the environment, and the provision by the government of social services, such as: equal education opportunities, access to health care, transportation infrastructure, basic food for the hungry and basic shelter for the homeless.

That doesn't sound bad either. A well-ran, productive society could easily achieve these modest goals for the people with resources to spare. But I do not believe it is necessarily within the confines of the constitution for the government to be involved in all these aspects.

but it continues.......

Some American liberals, who call themselves classical liberals, neoliberals, or libertarians, support fundamental liberal ideals but disagree with modern liberal thought, holding that economic freedom is more important than equality of opportunity, and that promoting the general welfare of society exceeds the legitimate role of government.

Holy Crap! Libertarians are classified as a traditional liberal?

Well, I am a conservative damnit! So let's look at that definition so I can feel better about myself!

Conservatism (Latin: conservare, "to retain") is a political and social philosophy that promotes retaining traditional institutions and supports, at most, minimal and gradual change in society. A person who follows the philosophies of conservatism is referred to as a traditionalist or conservative. Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, while others oppose modernism and seek a return to "the way things were"

That sounds pretty good as well. Slow and steady will win the race...as they say. But how can I agree with liberal ideology and conservatism too?

My head hurts. There's got to be a way to explain this!

Liberal Conservatism

Liberal conservatism is a variant of conservatism that combines conservative values and policies with classical liberal stances.[29] As these latter two terms have had different meanings over time and across countries, liberal conservatism also has a wide variety of meanings. Historically, the term often referred to the combination of economic liberalism, which champions laissez-faire markets, with the classical conservatism concern for established tradition, respect for authority and religious values. It contrasted itself with classical liberalism, which supported freedom for the individual in both the economic and social spheres.

Conservative Liberalism

Conservative liberalism is a variant of liberalism that combines liberal values and policies with conservative stances, or, more simply, the right wing of the liberal movement.[30][31][32] The roots of conservative liberalism are found at the beginning of the history of liberalism. Until the two World Wars, in most European countries the political class was formed by conservative liberals, from Germany to Italy. The events such as World War I occurring after 1917 brought the more radical version of classical liberalism to a more conservative (i.e. more moderate) type of liberalism

What?!

You mean to tell me that you can be a liberal and a conservative at the same time? Why didn't anyone tell me?

But...but this doesn't jive with the current political paradigm and rhetoric in which conservatives are stuffy, stuck-up stiffs that want you live their way and where the liberals are communist Marxists that want to force their welfare on you!

This means that I can find a term that fits my personal ideology more better than just conservative or liberal. I no longer have to conform to a definition in which certain pre-conceived notions are the driving force behind the ideology and how we interact with the opposing side.

I now have a term I can use to define myself and I am empowered with the ability to refine that definition to fit my own personal ideology! So from here on out, I no longer consider myself a conservative, nor am I going to take offense when I am labeled a liberal!

I'm a liberal conservative....or a conservative liberal. It's my choice and there is nothing you can do about it!

How about you? Is it slightly possible that you may be a liberal conservative. Maybe you're a conservative liberal. Either way, you and I do not have to be afraid of the polarizing rhetoric that is thrown around by both sides.

We can be liberal when we want. We can be conservative if we choose.

Hows that for ideological freedom?

Link
Link
Link

in a pre-globalization society, libertarianism (pure liberalism) was valid. yes, unrestrained free market, but not at the expense of say, the environment..free market doesn't mean free destruction. that was the only point of contention overall between free market and regulations.

Now things have changed dramatically due to a smaller world, a world where you can indeed ship a ton of materials from one country (china) to another and it be cheaper than having it made locally due to no worker protections and standards..aka, slave labor.
so, its literally a modern society that is trying to keep a slave based society..(slaves being 3rd world nations).

Our biggest boom in american society is a post-slave society where we entered the guilded age, industrial age, etc. but yes, as we advance and come up with tech that alters dynamics, we must alter then the rules..

free market capitalism and trade -must- be regulated now to protect us from a slave based society once again else we will fall back down to..well, you can see it playing out now with the massive unprecedented wealth disparity and rampant unemployment.

Conservative economics is a pre-globalization mindset..it is a slave based society mindset now..and just because its not americans in the field picking cotton doesn't mean its any less slave based..out of sight does not make it right.

I'm a fuselage extremist.

I think we should cut the damn wings off and guide this missile into space!

Definitions change much, I find it is easier to talk about what you believe in then putting a label on ones self.

I really have a basic want, its leave me be and ill leave you be. If you have something to say, please bring it to my attention via some sort of civil discourse. If your blathering on, ill believe that you just want to share your opinion (as I do on occasion, believe me I can blather ).

reply to post by sheepslayer247
I call myself so conservative, that I could be the love-child of Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney.


But, surprisingly enough, I tend to lean towards libertarianism.

Then again, if I went by what I'm called on this site, I'd be a;
Terrorist
Extremist
Racist
Race-traitor (my favorite)
Hater
Fascist
blah-blah-blah.

sheepslayer? Just face it.

You're a commie.

reply to post by beezzer


Well I do have a red pickup....oh, and there's a hammer in the back toolbox.

Maybe I am a commie. But at least it's on my own terms!

But you lean towards libertarianism. So you're a liberal! Welcome aboard Beez.

From an economic and foreign policy standpoint, I'm old school conservative. Some consider me extremist right wing, in fact. I believe in international trade tariffs on goods imported into the US while I believe in no barriers to free trade within the US. I believe in Roosevelt's "speak softly and carry a big stick" philosophy on foreign policy. I believe the downfall of US involvement in international wars isnt rooted in some philosphical bullcrap regarding our legitimacy as world police but, rather, is due to the US no longer claiming the spoils of war. If we fought wars like they had been fought for the entirety of history pre-Geneva Accords, our military excursions would pay for themselves and not be an economic boondoggle on the taxpayer. I support full border closure until we get our house in order and then very limited immigration with full efforts to prevent illegal immigration on both the national and state levels. I believe the environment should be protected, but we need established criteria which depend on real, proven science... Not the hysterical ravings of profit driven madmen like AlGore and we MUST balance the costs and benefits of each policy. If we can save the Cagalacky Mudskipper from becoming endangered, but that comes at a cost of hundreds of jobs and lost growth, then the price is too high and it's time to put Darwin's theory, survival of the fittest, into full action.

From a social standpoint, I lean heavily Libertarian. I believe in minimal government aid and limited welfare, low or non existent taxation of the people, greater privatization of public infrastructure in regards to construction funding, operating costs, and usage fees (I've worked quite a bit in the Public Private Partnership world the past couple of years and I think the model has great potential AS LONG AS the risks are borne jointly and not majority dropped on the taxpayer's doorstep.) I am pro-life, but am also smart enough to recognize that as a nonstarter political quagmire that only exists as a debate topic to artificially create strife between political ethoses, in other words, nothing is going to change in regards to abortion law in the US, so why in the hell do so many people allow themselves to get sucked into that trap? I believe the Constitution is a living document, but that doesn't mean it needs to evolve. We simply must take it at face value... The right to freedom of speech SHALL NOT be infringed, neither shall the right to bear arms, etc. On most other social issues I harbor a high degree of indifference... I don't really care if gay marriage is legal or illegal, I could care less about drug laws outside of the fact that the war on drugs is a losing effort, both economically and socially.

reply to post by burdman30ott6


I can agree with much of what you said, so it sounds like you do not fit one definition or the other as well.

reply to post by burdman30ott6


So eloquently put, and echoing much of my own sentiment.

2nd line Well done!
3rd line; Be careful of the Public/private partnerships as the UN Agenda 21 uses them as means to control from the top down and the bottom up.
I listen to talk radio often as I am driving the highway, and there is an ad about a local conservation program that sounds to me like it came right out of Agenda 21....it is in an area highly undeveloped and one wonders why they are not inviting more development here. Of course the Tetons are here and there is a UN inspired buffer zone that the conservationists do not want human hands on.

I'm smashed all over the whole spectrum, conservative, libertarian and left/liberal, depending on the issue. I don't understand how a political party can satisfy each INDIVIDUAL'S beliefs and positions on the issues. I mean, we're individuals, right? Why join a party that has positions you disagree with?

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by sheepslayer247

 

I call myself so conservative, that I could be the love-child of Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney.

I am a mixture of Donald Trump and I would have to go with Romney

reply to post by sheepslayer247


As my conservative tea party friends would say. if you mention that you have liberal beliefs.

You are a liberal!!!!.

I have been called a liberal on a different more conservative forums than this site.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Well, somewhat off topic, but the reason we have the Big Two parties is deeply rooted in campaign financing. Nuntil we have real campaign finance reform, we will never escape the two party system. It is just too damn expensive to run for any office higher than local government without getting the advantage of that PAC money. The problem with reform is the manner in which it is adopted. Television and radio commercials are only a piece of the pie, albeit likely the easiest piece to regulate spending on. You'd also have to establish some sort of travel expense regulations which were iron clad (in other words, no, Mitt Romney cannot dip into his millionaire's wallet to self fund all the cross country trips he wishes, nor can Obama take tax payer funded rally trips on Air Force One anytime he gets the urge.) We are in the Internet age, maybe the solution to meaningful travel restrictions is video conferencing, regulated, expense and opportunity controlled video conferencing.

I just don't see a way out of a two party stranglehold on democracy before that issue is addressed and resolved.

I am a devoted Conservoliberaltarian with Fascist/ Stalinist tendancies nourished by a diet of strict vagitarianism. I find political affiliations assinine. I find religious affiliations assinine. I find anything that separates us assinine. We are one. They want to keep us seperate. You are playing THEIR GAME. Time for us to play our own game.

reply to post by sheepslayer247


"Liberals" are not really "Liberals" anymore. Most "Liberals" are actually "Progressive" .. "Classical Liberalism" notes the definitions you reference (which technically would be Conservative Liberals, because Classical Liberals are also called Libertarians)

Progressivism began in the USA in the early 1900's .. there are several variations, however the definition established in the 1950-60's maintains it's definition. Mostly pertaining social policy, but maintaining the "nanny state" mentality of keeping Government involved with personal affairs. Progressivism was a term coined for American Socialist/Communist .. using those words back then was practically an insult, so they took the idealistic ideologies from Socialism and branded it Progressivism.

I have been labeled a "people like you" by some in this very thread.

And that's all well and good because I sure as hell wouldn't want to subscribe to their brand of ideological, control freak, fascism that is anything but conservative.

I wear the PLY designation with pride.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by sheepslayer247

 

As my conservative tea party friends would say. if you mention that you have liberal beliefs.

You are a liberal!!!!.

I have been called a liberal on a different more conservative forums than this site.

edit on 1-9-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)

That's fine. I am not afraid to be called a liberal, a conservative or a fat space monkey from Pluto. It doesn't matter to me anymore.

I thinks it's about time for people to stand by their beliefs regardless of what words are used by partisan hacks to label me.

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
That's fine. I am not afraid to be called a liberal, a conservative or a fat space monkey from Pluto.

I know that's what I'll be calling you from now on.

Everyone has it all mixed in. Anyone that is totally just one ideology is clinically insane. Classical liberalism, which is most closely associated with modern libertarianism, is what most people are ideologically, but won't admit to their friends who espouse conserliberalsociocommunofascism...even though those friends are also likely libertarians.

/TOA

reply to post by The Old American


That's Mr. Fat Space Monkey to you....

I just find that these labels we put on ourselves are all too often disingenuous and false. As you said, it's a mix of everything. So why does the partisan language have to be so alienating?