# Is liberalism dying worldwide? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 15, 2010, 10:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221 "2010-12-15T10:15:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Mr\_Smashy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2bfe46/32.png) [@Mr\_Smashy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Smashy)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/81 "2010-12-15T19:50:56Z")
> [@villa](#): > > Never heard it in my life. Then again, I don’t hang out with crazy whack job the market can solve all ills people. I am sure one of them said it. So just because you didn’t make it up, I would advise you against assuming the people you hang out with are a normal cross section of society. I guess I hang out in True Red Virginia then. And among a lot of rich people, gated community, country club, other execs at my company, etc. You know, the backbone of this country! ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/82 "2010-12-15T20:02:08Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > I’ve seen that phrase before, more than once, in one form or another. Here’s[one use](http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/12/capitalists-on-way-up-socialists-on-way.html), here’s a slightly inverted use: [“You can’t be for capitalism on the way up and socialism on the way down.” - Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Sept. 21, 2008.](http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=NewsLibrary&p_multi=WRAB&d_place=WRAB&p_theme=newslibrary2&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=12379707A8E04778&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM) So it does exist. :rolleyes: **Of course you can,** or vice-versa, and without being in any way irrational. I know most committed libertarians and socialists both assume their way is the best way for **every** society at **all** times, but it ain’t necessarily so. System/ideology X might be the best thing for a country at one time in its history and system/ideology Y might be the best thing for the country at a later time; and still later, the best thing might be to give another turn to system/ideology X – or, perhaps, system/ideology Z, something we don’t even have name for yet because the conditions for it don’t exist yet. ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Smashy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2bfe46/32.png) [@Mr\_Smashy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Smashy)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/83 "2010-12-15T20:02:17Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Ahem: > This was in support of your comment “the history of civilizations is capitalism on the way up, socialism on the way down.” If you weren’t saying they declined because of socialism (“then they got all socialist-y and now look at them”), you chose your words badly. > > ETA: Yes, exactly. True, when dealing with liberals, one must be exact; they generally can’t connect the dots. For example: Look at this ridiculous \*socialism \*strawmen discussion you keep trying to have with me. I use the word as a shortcut describing greater government control (through higher taxes, spending and regulation). With capitalism the opposite. That’s it. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/84 "2010-12-15T20:02:43Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > I guess I hang out in True Red Virginia then. And among a lot of rich people, gated community, country club, other execs at my company, etc. > > You know, the backbone of this country! And this is meant to impress me? Or even to convince me it isn’t a phrase that originated amongst the dribbling insane as they masterbated across their copies of Atlas Shrugged? ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/85 "2010-12-15T20:04:50Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > True, when dealing with liberals, one must be exact; they generally can’t connect the dots. For example: Look at this ridiculous \*socialism \*strawmen discussion you keep trying to have with me. > > I use the word as a shortcut describing greater government control (through higher taxes, spending and regulation). With capitalism the opposite. That’s it. Oddly enough, in normal conversation (you know, outside of those rich guys in monocles and top hats at the country club lighting cigars with $100 bills), you don’t just get to redefine words to mean what you want them to. It leaves you open to people thinking you don’t know what you are talking about. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/86 "2010-12-15T20:05:44Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > I guess I hang out in True Red Virginia then. And among a lot of rich people, gated community, country club, other execs at my company, etc. > > You know, the backbone of this country! Is this metaphor drawn from the biology of some other planet where the “backbone” of a vertebrate-analogue is actually a parasitic organism? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/87 "2010-12-15T20:10:04Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > I use the word as a shortcut describing greater government control (through higher taxes, spending and regulation). With capitalism the opposite. That’s it. Here’s the problem: _that’s not what socialism means, and you used the word incorrectly_. You used it the way a Republican candidate for office would use it (as a proxy for ‘Democrat’), but it doesn’t have very much to do with what socialism is. That’s why your meaning was not understood. Do a better job picking your words and we won’t have this problem. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/88 "2010-12-15T20:43:57Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > True, when dealing with liberals, one must be exact; they generally can’t connect the dots. For example: Look at this ridiculous \*socialism \*strawmen discussion you keep trying to have with me. > > I use the word as a shortcut describing greater government control (through higher taxes, spending and regulation). With capitalism the opposite. That’s it. I think that use is unhelpful. Most of the time we are concerned more with what government accomplishes rather than how big its tax base is, unless we are ideologues concerned only with government’s apparent size. In fact, a small government with little regulation can have a high tax base, because it’s subsidizing much of the private sector. Kind of like the USA today. Government mostly regulates government, not private industry. But it subsidizes private citizens with most of its money. So it looks like government is really big, but it’s actually very limited in many ways (not that that’s any consolation to those interned as undesirable minorities in California’s prison system). ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/89 "2010-12-15T20:51:58Z")
Vegetarians? ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/90 "2010-12-15T20:52:43Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > True, **when dealing with liberals, one must be exact** ; they generally can’t connect the dots. For example: Look at this ridiculous \*socialism \*strawmen discussion you keep trying to have with me. > > **I use the word as a shortcut describing greater government control** (through higher taxes, spending and regulation). With capitalism the opposite. That’s it. Oh the irony. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/91 "2010-12-15T20:54:25Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > No, you’re not celebrating too quickly. If the last few elections have taught us anything, it’s that all trends continue forever and the rosiest predictions of partisan optimists always come true in every way. > > With their populations aging, I’m not sure how sustainable Western welfare states are into the distant future. Equating that with the death of liberalism worldwide is ridiculous. So is describing the U.S. midterm elections as a ‘massive revolt.’ With our electoral system it’s impossible. A margin of a few percent the popular vote cannot be a “massive revolt”. If the House is the teacup and the Senate is the saucer in which the heated arguments cool, then the electorate is the table over which spilled tea spreads and eventually drips of the edge. ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Smashy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2bfe46/32.png) [@Mr\_Smashy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Smashy)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/92 "2010-12-15T21:23:07Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Here’s the problem: _that’s not what socialism means, and you used the word incorrectly_. You used it the way a Republican candidate for office would use it (as a proxy for ‘Democrat’), but it doesn’t have very much to do with what socialism is. That’s why your meaning was not understood. Do a better job picking your words and we won’t have this problem. Good Lord. :rolleyes: Fine. Don’t call it socialism then. I find it a useful term representing the end of the scale on the ‘liberal’ side. I don’t know what word we’d use for the extreme capitalism side… whatever Hong Kong used to be I guess. You can use a different word for extreme liberalism… Universal-Clove-Cigarettes-and-Mandatory-Prius-Ownership? Personally, I think it’s useful to think of the previous examples: Britian and France, once world powers, get more socia… liberal… and are trainwrecks (fiscally) now. Most American states in good fiscal shape are conservative, most in dire straights are liberal. It can’t all be coincidence, can it? Again, one way on the way up, another on the way down. Now, did the liberal, share-the-wealth policies sap initiative of the masses and cause the slow-motion meltdowns? Or did the meltdown spawn the liberalism as the politicians saw an opportunity to engage in a populist/class warfare strategy, create a permanent underclass/constituency and stay in office? That would be a discussion worth having, instead of the silly labels one, if anyone here is intellectually honest. ---
**Author:** ![HRoark43](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/bc8723/32.png) [@HRoark43](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HRoark43)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/93 "2010-12-15T21:23:42Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > No, you’re not celebrating too quickly. If the last few elections have taught us anything, it’s that all trends continue forever and the rosiest predictions of partisan optimists always come true in every way. > > With their populations aging, I’m not sure how sustainable Western welfare states are into the distant future. Equating that with the death of liberalism worldwide is ridiculous. So is describing the U.S. midterm elections as a ‘massive revolt.’ It was a reversal from 2008, but it reflected frustrations with the economy that caused the Democrats to lose some independent voters, and was not a philosophical rejection of liberalism. On top of that, the results weren’t even that unusual: it’s common for the party to control the White House to lose seats in midterms (although not usually that many), and as usual, midterm voters were older and whiter than the general election voters. I’m sure you saw the state-by-state legislative results, right? Republicans scored a near record-breaking string of victories at the state level, across the country.And You don’t think most of this was fueled by anger about ObamaCare? > [@ralph124c](#): > > I think that we in the USA have realized that the “Great Society” was a disaster. We spent trillions on public housing..only to see them turn into slums. We poured money into “education” only to see educational standards decline. We launched all kinds of nutrition programs-and now obesity is the largest public health problem. > Welfare liberalism has not solved social problems-it has contributed to them. History shows that much. It appears to me that voters have learned their lesson this time, but who am I but a random forum poster? I guess the legions of protestors out there screaming “enough!” just weren’t loud enough, nor were their votes. (scratching head here…) > [@El\_Kabong](#): > > Yeah, after all there were no poor people or slums before there was public housing. > > Meanwhile, maybe the OP could explain what he means when he says (I’m sort of interpreting here) ‘patriotic’ Americans only vote republican. Unless he’s got a really good explanation for this inflammatory statement, it’s gonna be pretty hard to take anything else he says seriously. Fine. I’m sorry I implied everyone else isn’t patriotic. I’ll try to be less inflammatory. Please don’t beat me for slipping up. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/94 "2010-12-15T21:28:12Z")
> [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](#): > > With our electoral system it’s impossible. A margin of a few percent the popular vote cannot be a “massive revolt”. Quite the reverse. With our winner-take-all, single-member-district system for electing Congess (including the Senate, each state being in effect a single district), a margin of a few percent **or less** of the popular vote **can be** a “massive revolt.” I read once, don’t have a cite handy at the moment, that in the 1994 “Republican Revolution,” Pub candidates’ aggregate national vote total exceed that of Dem candidates by only one-half of one percent. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/95 "2010-12-15T21:29:51Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > Personally, I think it’s useful to think of the previous examples: Britian and France, once world powers, get more socia… liberal… and are trainwrecks (fiscally) now. I’m sure the decline of the British and French as world powers has absolutely nothing to do with their full participation in the two bloodiest conflicts in history, oddly enough in the half century preceeding their decline from status as world powers, and instead everything to do with getting more “liberal” which, if you had the first idea what liberal meant, you wouldn’t use in this situation either. ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Smashy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2bfe46/32.png) [@Mr\_Smashy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Smashy)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/96 "2010-12-15T21:31:54Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > In fact, a small government with little regulation can have a high tax base, because it’s subsidizing much of the private sector. Kind of like the USA today. Wait… are you suggesting that America’s government is small? Most people in this country would disagree. A blog [here](http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2008/03/government-spending-as-percentage-of.html) suggest that Government expenditures as a percentage of GDP, which is not a bad proxy for government size, is 40% in this country. That puts us as the 70th largest, in the top half. And that was 2 years ago, when our government spending was a hell of a lot less. I wouldn’t call it small, especially as it relates to recent history. ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Smashy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2bfe46/32.png) [@Mr\_Smashy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Smashy)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/97 "2010-12-15T21:33:25Z")
> [@villa](#): > > I’m sure the decline of the British and French as world powers has absolutely nothing to do with their full participation in the two bloodiest conflicts in history, oddly enough in the half century preceeding their decline from status as world powers, and instead everything to do with getting more “liberal” which, if you had the first idea what liberal meant, you wouldn’t use in this situation either. Which begs the question, were they in decline before WWII? Or has it all happened since then? PS I’m using liberal the way I think the OP meant it. If you mean libertarian, sort of, that’s a different discussion. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/98 "2010-12-15T21:34:10Z")
> [@HRoark43](#): > > I’m sure you saw the state-by-state legislative results, right? Republicans scored a near record-breaking string of victories at the state level, across the country.And You don’t think most of this was fueled by anger about ObamaCare? :dubious: Certainly not. What ever made you think so? For one thing, [Americans who do not think the healthcare package goes far **enough** outnumber opponents 2-1.](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39369615/ns/health-health_care/) ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/99 "2010-12-15T21:36:54Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > Which begs the question, were they in decline before WWII? Or has it all happened since then? Of course they were. They were both shattered by the Great War. And I simply don’t think you have sufficient grasp on political theory to be in any way comfortable of how you use any term regarding politics, be it socialism or liberalism. ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Smashy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2bfe46/32.png) [@Mr\_Smashy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Smashy)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2010, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221/100 "2010-12-15T21:40:38Z")
> [@villa](#): > > Of course they were. They were both shattered by the Great War. > > And I simply don’t think you have sufficient grasp on political theory to be in any way comfortable of how you use any term regarding politics, be it socialism or liberalism. Well OK then, by your math then Japan should never have risen post WWII? or Germany? Surely they were both hammered as much or more than Britian and France, yet both rose to economic prowess under capitalistic systems (until very recently I guess). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-liberalism-dying-worldwide/564221.md?page=6)