Good debate on libertarianism

[IDBillzFan]

What does it mean? To me, it's been coopted by a socialist Republican Party that is not interested in conservative approaches to spending. It is also not interested in conservative approaches to controlling government control of people's lives. I'd say the term Conservative is hollow these days.

 

If you have an accepted meaning, by all means, do share.

I think what you're trying to say is that the meaning of "Republican" has changed, not the meaning of "Conservative." In my mind, there was a time when using those two terms together would have been considered redundant. Not any more. When people like McCain, Schwarzenegger or even Specter calling themselves "Republicans", it kind of makes my point. They can get away with calling themselves "Republicans" but they could never, ever get away with calling themselves "conservatives."

 

My hope is that the current administration has made tremendous efforts to bring committed conservative politicians out of the closet and into the fold; and when I say "committed," I mean they stick to their principles and not flip all over al a John McCain for the sake of getting elected.

[Peace]

What does it mean? To me, it's been coopted by a socialist Republican Party that is not interested in conservative approaches to spending. It is also not interested in curbing gov't control of people's lives. I'd say the term Conservative is hollow these days.

 

If you have an accepted meaning, by all means, do share.

 

I think what you're trying to say is that the meaning of "Republican" has changed, not the meaning of "Conservative." In my mind, there was a time when using those two terms together would have been considered redundant. Not any more. When people like McCain, Schwarzenegger or even Specter calling themselves "Republicans", it kind of makes my point. They can get away with calling themselves "Republicans" but they could never, ever get away with calling themselves "conservatives."

 

My hope is that the current administration has made tremendous efforts to bring committed conservative politicians out of the closet and into the fold; and when I say "committed," I mean they stick to their principles and not flip all over al a John McCain for the sake of getting elected.

 

But I ask: What is a Conservative? I honestly don't know. I see it as a term without meaning, hollowed out because of its long association with Republicans. Put to the fire, I would say a Conservative espouses fiscal restraint combined with acceptable government intervention to promote traditional family values.

 

That being the case, it's value 2 regarding government intervention RE traditional family values that differentiates a conservative from a libertarian. BTW, this is me on a limb: I don't think anyone can agree on what "conservative" means anymore.

 

Republican changed when Reagan made the big tent mistake. Accepting the Southern Democrat/Family Values crowd into the Republican Party was the beginning of the end for a party that supposedly valued small government.

Edited September 7, 2010 by Peace

[murra]

peace, yo

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

What does that mean? The term "Conservative" has lost any accepted meaning.

no not true at all. the "republican" party no longer shares my ideals, they are just democrat-lite with their wreckless spending and policies. the majority of modern republicans no longer hold true to the party and constitution's principles and I feel the party has left me.

 

I mostly identify now with the conservative / libertarian ideals.

 

I want smaller government, less government involvement in my day to day life, conservative interpretation of the constitution and conservative values. in my ideal world there would be a party which includes that.

 

I think what you're trying to say is that the meaning of "Republican" has changed, not the meaning of "Conservative." In my mind, there was a time when using those two terms together would have been considered redundant. Not any more. When people like McCain, Schwarzenegger or even Specter calling themselves "Republicans", it kind of makes my point. They can get away with calling themselves "Republicans" but they could never, ever get away with calling themselves "conservatives."

 

My hope is that the current administration has made tremendous efforts to bring committed conservative politicians out of the closet and into the fold; and when I say "committed," I mean they stick to their principles and not flip all over al a John McCain for the sake of getting elected.

 

^ +2 what you said

Edited September 8, 2010 by drinkTHEkoolaid

[Peace]

no not true at all. the "republican" party no longer shares my ideals, they are just democrat-lite with their wreckless spending and policies. the majority of modern republicans no longer hold true to the party and constitution's principles and I feel the party has left me.

 

I mostly identify now with the conservative / libertarian ideals.

 

I want smaller government, less government involvement in my day to day life, conservative interpretation of the constitution and conservative values. in my ideal world there would be a party which includes that.

 

 

It sounds like you equate Libertarian and Conservative. I do not. Nor, I believe, do many people. Lots of people--in fact likely "most" people--equate Conservative with Republican (ie, family values type conservatives).

 

This is the problem with using the term "conservative." Rush Limbaugh would eagerly call himself a Conservative. I--closest to a Libertarian--would never call myself a Conservative.

 

You won't find much agreement regarding the term and that's why I don't even bother using it anymore. Democrats and Republicans carry some meaning. They are very similar but their differences define them.

[Magox]

It sounds like you equate Libertarian and Conservative. I do not. Nor, I believe, do many people. Lots of people--in fact likely "most" people--equate Conservative with Republican (ie, family values type conservatives).

 

This is the problem with using the term "conservative." Rush Limbaugh would eagerly call himself a Conservative. I--closest to a Libertarian--would never call myself a Conservative.

 

You won't find much agreement regarding the term and that's why I don't even bother using it anymore. Democrats and Republicans carry some meaning. They are very similar but their differences define them.

There are different types of conservatism.

 

1) Social conservatives

 

and

 

2) Fiscal conservatives

 

I consider myself a fiscal conservative. I believe in controlled government spending, lower taxes and a leaner and meaner government.

 

Social conservatives care more about issues such as abortion, gay marriage, immigration, war on drugs etc.

 

Libertarians believe in an ultra small government, laissez-faire attitude in just about all aspects, limited spending, legalization of drugs etc.

 

So there are some core similarities between fiscal conservatives and libertarian POV's.

[Rob's House]

There are different types of conservatism.

 

1) Social conservatives

 

and

 

2) Fiscal conservatives

 

I consider myself a fiscal conservative. I believe in controlled government spending, lower taxes and a leaner and meaner government.

 

Social conservatives care more about issues such as abortion, gay marriage, immigration, war on drugs etc.

 

Libertarians believe in an ultra small government, laissez-faire attitude in just about all aspects, limited spending, legalization of drugs etc.

 

So there are some core similarities between fiscal conservatives and libertarian POV's.

The only exception I take with your description is regarding immigration. I agree that libertarianism takes a generally more relaxed view on immigration policy than your typical conservative, but I wouldn't classify open border policy as a libertarian issue.

 

I know several of us who lean libertarian are inclined to a more relaxed a free flowing form of legal immigration, which if that's what you are referring to, I would then agree.

[IDBillzFan]

But I ask: What is a Conservative? I honestly don't know. I see it as a term without meaning, hollowed out because of its long association with Republicans. Put to the fire, I would say a Conservative espouses fiscal restraint combined with acceptable government intervention to promote traditional family values.

First, I apologize for the Barry Brady-like length of this. It wasn't intentional.

 

I think your inability to find an acceptable meaning for "conservative" doesn't mean one doesn't exist. Now, I understand what you're saying, and the simple truth is that today's political climate is probably creating your confusion. Part of the problem is that the people who are fully engaged now -- me being one of them -- find themselves needing to prioritizing their beliefs, and consequently we find ourselves cleaning the political attic where so many pre-conceived notions have been left untouched in storage.

 

Personally speaking, politics was never discussed in my house. In fact, I can still remember the first true moment I found my political footing. I was tending bar at an empty campus pub one night, and sat virtually alone watching a new president give a speech explaining why we needed to build our defenses against an ever-threatening Russian army. I was completely mesmerized, not just by the message, but by the messenger. That was the moment I became a Republican.

 

Now, that said, like most Americans, I just tossed myself in that category without thinking that I was able to modify my positions. It was simple; I was a Republican. This is what Republicans believe. Therefore, this is what I believe.

 

That's changing now for millions of Americans, as we suddenly find ourselves needing to clean the attic of pre-conceived notions in order to better defend the positions we care about most. Suddenly you have millions of political neophytes FINALLY speaking out in the face of the embarrassing stimulus and health care bills, but speaking out based on those old notions. So what happens? The political left, including a large part of the media, begins the process of defining people who are too new to following politics to effectively define themselves first.

 

Enter the name-calling: we're hypocritical racists and bigots who never complained when Bush was screwing things up, so we should shut up while Obama screws things up. We're intolerant of muslims and faggots and spics and especially those nasty colored people, and THIS is why we're yelling. Because we're white, and we're afraid all the coloreds are going to take over!! This is stupid, to be sure, but I've quickly learned that this is what the left does when it can't defend itself.

 

So I understand your confusion, but I personally think it's a good thing. People are starting to rebuild the meaning of conservative, starting with the most basic of beliefs: fiscal restraint, smaller government with less intervention in our lives, with an eye toward protecting our country. What's good about this is the formerly a-typical "Republicans," in cleaning out and prioritizing their attics, are finally admitting that they don't care that deeply about the stupid stuff that used to cause division; gay marriage, legalizing marijuana, etc.

 

It's a process, and the process will have ups and downs and success and failures, but in the end, this is pretty good stuff for our country because regardless of what you hear from the far left, these pissed off Americans are probably not going away. Yes, they're redefining their priorities, but they're not going away.

[/dev/null]

I am on nobody's side, because nobody is on my side, little orc

-Treebeard

 

Whether you're young or old, some Tolkien is always enlightening

[X. Benedict]

First, I apologize for the Barry Brady-like length of this. It wasn't intentional.

 

No apology required. Good stuff.

 

In my opinion - and this is why the country needs conservatives - is that they should be the ones asking "At what expense?" when legislation is proposed.

 

Where this got lost in the last decade was largely in their "starve the beast" approach to legislating and budgeting. Budget deficits would eventually cause the role of government to shrink because and nobody would be dumb enough to keep borrowing. Add this to some very unsuccessful attempts at deregulation and ...

 

50 years from now we might be talking about the era of the Chinese Funded American wars.

 

Now I'm no conservative, and certainly no believer in the spiritual morality of markets nonsense I hear from time to time.. . But I would be interested in a Conservative that says fiscal sanity starts with a much more limited Executive Branch and a reduced overseas role.

 

But...I really can't see this movement getting divorced from the Judeo-Christian civilization/American Exceptionalism/Culture Warrior folks.

[drnykterstein]

I am on nobody's side, because nobody is on my side, little orc

-Treebeard

 

Whether you're young or old, some Tolkien is always enlightening

 

http://www.nostate.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/votefornobody.jpg