To prevent any further derailment of this thread by me: McCain supporters: nauseous yet? (Falwell) and to help me understand what the Dems and Liberals of the SDMB mean by liberal please define, debate and offer your point of view of what a liberal politician is and why John Kerry apparently is not.
I think of Kerry & Kennedy as Liberals, but it appears many members of this board do not. So apparently the definition of liberal as I grew up with does not match the mainstream of the SDMB at least.
Here’s a good starting point: If you are in any way affiliated with or supported by the Democratic Leadership Council – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council – or any of its associated organizations, think-tanks or publications, then you are not a liberal, you are a “neoliberal” – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberal – which is a lot like a neoconservative except in foreign policy, and even there it’s hard to see a fundamental difference, only a difference in emphasis.
IIRC, the UK’s old Liberal Party merged with the Social Democrats to form the Liberal Democratic Party. Do the LibDems support all those things? Also, in the UK, what is a “liberal’s” view of foreign policy, in particular the Iraq War and the European Union?
Has the old usage of “liberal” to mean “libertarian” entirely died out in Britain, as it has in the U.S.?
Strange disconnect I see, Not all greens are Liberals or leftist. There are Green Republicans (myself) and even some Green Conservatives. Conservatives can believe long term Fiscal health of the nation is tied to careful use of natural resources and replenishment of said. Protecting Coastal area, etc.
Many Republicans are fairly liberal of Social issues but might be Hawks or very anti-welfare or some other issue.
Thanks again BrainGlutton, that was a great and informative thread.
I hope someone will chime in on the actual current politicians and explain John Kerry. Still looks liberal to me with some exceptions of course.
I am having trouble with the Wiki on Neo-Liberal:
.
This doesn’t add up or make sense to me. I don’t see lumping Clinton in.
I might as well link to the Wiki article on Liberalism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal
Sounds like it will be hard to get an agreement on what is and who are the liberals.
Only if you equate “green” with “environmentalist.” If you capitalize it, then you are talking about a definite political formation/tendency, represented by two established political parties in the United States. http://www.gp.org/. http://www.greenparty.org/.
What? Clinton was a pro-business conservative as much as Reagan was.
I have voted green party quite often, including Nader in 2000. I know more Republicans that voted for Nader in 2000 then Democrats. Overall, the moderate Republicans I know felt disenfranchised by the Bush side of the party and were part of environmental groups. As this is only anecdotal and I am a member of several Environmental groups, I understand my experience was probably not typical.
Part of the Wiki Definition mentioned “It opposes socialism, protectionism and environmentalism.” I agree Clinton appeared opposed to socialism & protectionism **but not ** environmentalism. Reagan and Thatcher were opposed to all 3. The way Clinton went after Big Tobacco and Microsoft does not seem to fit the definition either and finally, he tried to get UHC in place.
You’re falling for the “no true liberal” fallacy. “Liberal” isn’t a group you get to join with a hierarchy to set the rules, so “liberal” means pretty much whatever people want it to mean. The real problem (for the Democrats) is that the Republicans have been successful in turning “liberal” into a pejorative, for the most part, and very few politicians in the US will self indentify as a liberal. Not so with “conservative”, which is a label worn proudly by many in the GOP.
You’re probably better off using it as relative marker: * Kennedy is more liberal than Kerry*, for example. You’re unlikely to get any reasonable size group to agree on who is and who isn’t a liberal.
You’ve hit it on the head. On the continuum of economic/socail/political leanings, the terms “liberal” and “conservative” are useful only as markers of your location relative to someone or something else.
In such a scenario, Sanders would not be a conservative in terms of his political ideology but he would be relatively more conservatice than everybody else in Congress.
WE OPPOSE:
Putting targets first
WE PROPOSE:
Putting patients first
Faster diagnosis so your NHS treatment can start more quickly
WE OPPOSE:
Tuition fees & top up fees
WE PROPOSE:
Scrapping student fees
Further education affordable to every student
WE OPPOSE:
Compulsory I.D. Cards
WE PROPOSE:
Spending the money on 10,000 more police
Funded by scrapping compulsory I.D. cards
WE OPPOSE:
Selling your home to pay for care
WE PROPOSE:
Free personal care for the elderly
No one forced to sell their home to pay for care
WE OPPOSE:
Ignoring climate change
WE PROPOSE:
Cleaner transport & cleaner energy
Cleaner transport, cleaner energy and a cleaner environment
WE OPPOSE:
£1.5 billion on the child trust fund
WE PROPOSE:
£1.5 billion towards reducing class sizes
Spend the £1.5 billion Child Trust Fund when it matters most
WE OPPOSE:
Means-testing pensioners
WE PROPOSE:
£100 extra per month starting with the over 75s
A million pensioners off means-testing
WE OPPOSE:
Hidden tax increases
WE PROPOSE:
Only one tax increase - on income above £100,000 per year
Only one tax increase on income over £100,000
WE OPPOSE:
Unfair council tax
WE PROPOSE:
Local income tax, saving typical households £450 per year
Local Income Tax is both fair and affordable
WE OPPOSE:
Bush & Blair on Iraq
WE PROPOSE:
Never again
It’s time to restore trust in government.*
Pro Europe as well (Very)
Judging from your link, it appears that the LibDems are now politically to the left of Labour (or at least Blair) whereas they used to work the center (both together and as separate parties). Is this perception correct?
Why do you say this? Clinton seemed much more inclined to allow new regulation, particularly in environmental areas, and passed, for example, the Family and Medical Leave Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act which would disqualify him from being a pro-business conservative. Nor do I recall business being too enamored with his universal medical care plan.
The legislation you mention might “disqualify” Clinton from being considered a strict pro-market economic libertarian – but pro-market and pro-business are two different things, and not all businesscritters oppose this kind of legislation. There are even “green Republicans,” some.
Opposition to Clinton’s far-from-universal health care plan came from the insurance industry (for obvious reasons), the Republican Party (for strategic reasons as much as anything else) and movement conservatives (for ideological reasons), not from the business community in general. (I’m sure many businesses would have welcomed it, if it relieved them from responsibility for providing their employees with health benefits.) It also failed because of (quite reasonable, IMO) opposition from the left, as an overly complex, halfway solution, compared to Canadian-style single-payer health care.
Of course some “businesscritters” might have supported the FMLA and the ADA - but are you asserting that this was actually a majority opinion in the business community?
While I think these are interesting examples to discuss (and it’s always fun to relive the early 90s), I brought them up to counter-illustrate why I think Clinton was not as pro-business as Reagan. But to be honest, your claim struck me as extraordinarily bizarre. I think most people would intuitively rank Reagan as significantly more pro-business than Clinton. I’d actually like to hear you elaborate on why you think otherwise.
“Liberal” isn’t a group you get to join with a hierarchy to set the rules, so “liberal” means pretty much whatever people want it to mean. The real problem (for the Democrats) is that the Republicans have been successful in turning “liberal” into a pejorative, for the most part, and very few politicians in the US will self indentify as a liberal. Not so with “conservative”, which is a label worn proudly by many in the GOP.