| | |  | This is the Conversation Forum for The Forum
<< Peak Oil..
Questions for God >> | |
| | | Subject: Liberalism
Posted Oct 21, 2009 by Potholer
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
6
  | | Surely, liberalism isn't really *that* left-wing?
People who get obsessively PC aren't being liberal.
People who desire state control of anything that moves aren't liberal.
People who believe/want everyone to be the same despite the clear evidence that people are different aren't being liberal.
|
| | | Subject: Liberalism
Posted Oct 21, 2009 by Zagreb - go and see "Moon", you won't regret it!
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
13
| | "Surely, liberalism isn't really *that* left-wing?
People who get obsessively PC aren't being liberal.
People who desire state control of anything that moves aren't liberal.
People who believe/want everyone to be the same despite the clear evidence that people are different aren't being liberal."
Exactly. Strictly-speaking, liberalism doesn't have to be leftwing; one can also be centre-right and still be described as a liberal (although most right-liberals identify as "classical liberals" these days).
Blame the Americans for the confusion; they use "liberal" as a synonym for "leftwing" (mainly because the American left began as liberalism and has always self-identified as such) and, sadly, more and more non-Americans have picked this up.
|
|  |
| | | Subject: Liberalism
Posted Oct 21, 2009 by Woodpigeon
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
14
| | Or is this some harkening back to the so-called liberal sixties, where (according to conservatives) the world went to hell in a hand-cart? Where the idea of extreme liberals as being bleeding heart pollyannas who had abandoned tradition in favour of a post-modern, earth mother lifestyle?
Hard to see how this approach (manning the barricades with daisies and joints), would lead to Stalinism..
|
| |
| | | Subject: Liberalism
Posted Oct 21, 2009 by Zagreb - go and see "Moon", you won't regret it!
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
15
| | >The "liberal" state is a pluralist state, and the contrast is with totalitarian states - theocracies, dictatorships, that kind of thing.
True, there's more to it than that, though. Liberals tend to value individual rights over collective rights (or, of course, outright authoritarianism), limited government, a highly representative and democratic state, republicanism (although this is more of a classical liberal position in these days of powerless monarchies), secularism, a free exchange of ideas, free markets and free trade (but rarely laissez-faire economics) and a limited welfare state.
Traditionally, Liberalism has been seen as a leftist position (and in the case of the likes of Thomas Paine, arguably a radical leftist one) but these days is considered rather-more centrist, liberals not tending to be firebrands and revolutionaries these days.
|
| | | Subject: Liberalism
Posted 5 Weeks Ago by Potholer
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
18
| | When it comes to something like the second vote in Ireland, are you suggesting that people were less well informed at the point of the second vote, or that people against the proposal considered the issue so unimportant that they didn't bother voting the second time?
Are you suggesting that the changes to the Lisbon treaty made after the first failed vote didn't have some effect, or that it was somehow *wrong* to make changes after people rejected the treaty the first time around and allow people to vote again?
Are you suggesting that the vote would have been held repeatedly until it passed even in the face of a second, third, or subsequent failure?
|
| | | Subject: Liberalism
Posted 5 Weeks Ago by McKay The Disorganised
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
19
| | Given that the French voted against it - so they re-jigged it, then when the Irish voted against it they made concessions, yes.
I am saying that they would have kept going either making changes until they got the answer they wanted or inventing reasons why the latest no didn't really mean no. Though of course they didn't actually alter anything, they just said that they would change it.
It is noticable that everyone who has been given a vote has voted no.
|
| | | Subject: Liberalism
Posted 5 Weeks Ago by Zagreb - go and see "Moon", you won't regret it!
This is a reply to this Posting
| | Posting
20
| | >A highly democratic state ? Then why do they favour the EU - where they make decisions without a vote - like picking a president - and when they get a result they don't like they insist on it being repeated until they get the answer they want ?
First, not all liberals favour the EU. Secondly, those that do tend to favour it because they favour closer political and economic co-operation between European countries. I've not heard a single pro-EU person from either side of the political fence claim the power of the commission is a good thing or that it doesn't need to become much more democratic - quite the opposite. Being in favour of the EU is different from favouring how the EU currently conducts itself.
I've also heard some arguments that things like Lisbon are a great deal less politically important than they're made out to be but (not being terribly interested in the internal workings of the EU) I've no idea how accurate this is.
|
|
|
   
 
Conversation list
Most of the content on h2g2 is created by h2g2's Researchers, who are members of the public. The views expressed are theirs and unless specifically stated are not those of the BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of any external sites referenced. In the event that you consider anything on this page to be in breach of the site's House Rules, please click on the relevant button to alert our Moderation Team. |
Home
