"conservative", "liberal"

[southern california guy]

I've heard the term "liberal" used by Republican talk show hosts. It seems to me that "liberal" and "conservative" are rather vague blanket terms. What's your definition?

Let's say somebody in the east is Catholic, pro-life, doesn't believe in living together before marriage, is married and has a large family -- but views the Democrats as the working mans party and is a Democrat. Is he a liberal?

Now on the west coast there's another guy. He came from a wealthy Republican family, was involved in Christian groups in college, and was also in a Fraternity. As part of a fraternity he had sex with many women. Now he's out and lives with his girlfriend -- who calls him her "fiance" -- and he has a son with his girlfriend. He's a "Christian", but he supports abortion. And he's a Republican, and he loved McCain -- but hated Palin. Is he a conservative?

[Nihil Obstat]

To me, at least..... liberal = moderately centre-left, conservative = moderate centre-right.

[Ziggamafu]

Conservatives are concerned and uptight. Liberals are reassured and irresponsible. How's that for blanket terminology?

Orthodox Catholics, on the other hand, are obedient to the voice of Christ in His Church. No more, no less. Which often means they are "conservative" on some issues and "liberal" on other issues. Which often means they are persecuted by both sides.

I try to be an orthodox Catholic, but I'm not persecuted too much so maybe I'm in trouble... /shrugs/

I love my Lord and His Church. I try my best. Good enough for me.

[Servus_Mariae]

"The business of Liberals is to make mistakes, the business of Conservatives is to insist on leaving them uncorrected" GK Chesterton.

I tend to see both of these terms as relative. In 1960, what it meant to be a liberal would probably sound like a moderate conservative today. A liberal in the middle east might seem like a conservative in the United States. The "center" seems to shift depending upon your environment/time. One might be conservative in one sense and liberal in another.
This is the case I think, because the terms "conservative" and "liberal" are methods and not creeds. Approaching a problem conservatively is to approach novelty being partial to the way things are while approaching a problem liberally is to approach a novelty being partial to innovation.

This is why the term 'conservative' and 'liberal' really don't work in a Catholic sense...because we actually have a creed and the available methods in responding to this creed are adherence or defiance (orthodoxy or heterodoxy)

[Socrates]

[quote name='southern california guy' date='13 May 2010 - 08:10 AM' timestamp='1273752646' post='2109836']
I've heard the term "liberal" used by Republican talk show hosts. It seems to me that "liberal" and "conservative" are rather vague blanket terms. What's your definition?

Let's say somebody in the east is Catholic, pro-life, doesn't believe in living together before marriage, is married and has a large family -- but views the Democrats as the working mans party and is a Democrat. Is he a liberal?

Now on the west coast there's another guy. He came from a wealthy Republican family, was involved in Christian groups in college, and was also in a Fraternity. As part of a fraternity he had sex with many women. Now he's out and lives with his girlfriend -- who calls him her "fiance" -- and he has a son with his girlfriend. He's a "Christian", but he supports abortion. And he's a Republican, and he loved McCain -- but hated Palin. Is he a conservative?
[/quote]
Yes, "conservative" and "liberal" are kind of vague blanket terms, and what exactly they mean depends on who you talk to, what time you're talking about, and what country you're in.

Generally, I'd regard an American conservative as one who believes in small, constitutionally-limited government, a literal reading of the Constitution, states' rights and property rights, free markets and respect for "traditional" religion and morality.
American liberals believe in expanding government social programs, an "evolving" Constitution that changes with the times, socialistic government regulation of the economy, and reject traditional morality in favor of "progressive" social causes like abortion and gay "rights."

As to the two guys in your examples, I don't know enough about them to call either one conservative or liberal, but I'd call your first man a naive fool, and the second a hypocritical fool.
Also keep in mind that "Republican" does not necessarily equal "conservative."

Edited May 13, 2010 by Socrates

[havok579257]

liberal's and conservatives are pretty much the same thing in today's politcal system.

liberal's are looked at as wanting big government and government involvement. conservatives aree looked at as wanting smaller government and less government involvement.

the reason the both are the same is because both want big government and at the same time want small government.

conservatives want small government involvement in non moral side of things but more government involvement in the moral side of things (abortion, gay marriage).

liberals want big government involvement in the moral side of things but less government involvement in the actual letter of the law and constitution.

so they are practically the same.

[Vincent Vega]

Conservative: A sellout who applies the term "conservative" to himself to bolster his political position and gain favour and power within his own camp while using "liberal" to try and taint the image of his opponent, again within his own camp.

Liberal: A sellout who applies the term "liberal" (or more often, "progressive") to himself to bolster his political position and gain favour and power within his own camp while using "conservative" to try and taint the image of his opponent, again within his own camp.


Gee, those definitions sound similar...

[Hilde]

Last year we were at the end of a cliff. This year we have taken one big step forward.

In Norway, the political parties that call themselves liberal are those that want smaller government with less power, and doesn't have an allergy to using private power. This goes beyond right/left but usually applies better to the moderate and right wing

Edited May 14, 2010 by Hilde

[Jesus_lol]

In Canada the Liberals and Conservatives(and NDP) take turns being the party that "couldnt possibly be any worse than the last guys" and they never fail to disappoint spectacularly.

[Servus_Mariae]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' date='14 May 2010 - 04:32 AM' timestamp='1273822357' post='2110501']
In Canada the Liberals and Conservatives(and NDP) take turns being the party that "couldnt possibly be any worse than the last guys" and they never fail to disappoint spectacularly.
[/quote]

I know what you mean...

I think that the only way either Canada or the USA can recover from this is if the people recognize that our politicians are not 'in charge' they are our employees. Unfortunately, we (US) live in a very 'comfortable' environment. As long as the government provides a sound and comfortable environment, the people are going to use this as an excuse to be complacent, disinterested, and inactive in there own community/country. Hence why we don't look for the best man for the job...we just look for the one that won't screw up our comfort as bad as the last one.

[Didymus]

I'm really getting in to Phillip Blond's definitions of the debate. Liberals are both left and right. On one side, God doesn't belong in my personal life, infringing on my rights and entitlements, and on the other, God doesn't belong in my economic life, where I subject my faith to laws based on materialism and the consumer culture. Basically, a liberal is an individualist. They may believe in socialism or laissez faire economics.

The conservative loves tradition, virtue, and morality.

read this:
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2010/jun/01/00006/

[Socrates]

[quote name='havok579257' date='13 May 2010 - 09:53 PM' timestamp='1273802038' post='2110287']
the reason the both are the same is because both want big government and at the same time want small government.

conservatives want small government involvement in non moral side of things but more government involvement in the moral side of things (abortion, gay marriage).

liberals want big government involvement in the moral side of things but less government involvement in the actual letter of the law and constitution.

so they are practically the same.
[/quote]
What you've written makes no sense.


It should be noted that conservative positions on moral issues such as abortion and "gay marriage" are not "big government" as some like to claim.

Roe v. Wade was in fact a prime example of federal court tyranny, which by Supreme Court decree, the federal government usurped the power of the individual states and the people of those states to make laws concerning abortion, but made unlimited abortion the law of the land, in direct violation of the 10th amendment of the Constitution, which states that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
And I consider outlawing abortion no more "big government" than outlawing any other form of murder.

Likewise, officially recognizing "gay marriage" would not give the government less power, but more, as it would give the state power to confer recognition and benefits upon "unions" over which it did not previously have that power.


[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' date='14 May 2010 - 02:55 AM' timestamp='1273820106' post='2110489']
Conservative: A sellout who applies the term "conservative" to himself to bolster his political position and gain favour and power within his own camp while using "liberal" to try and taint the image of his opponent, again within his own camp.

Liberal: A sellout who applies the term "liberal" (or more often, "progressive") to himself to bolster his political position and gain favour and power within his own camp while using "conservative" to try and taint the image of his opponent, again within his own camp.


Gee, those definitions sound similar...
[/quote]
Yeah, make up your own definitions and you can make them say what you like.

It would be more accurate to describe politicians as sellouts (though some would use not so nice words).
Political power is won and kept by appealing to as many possible different individuals and interest groups, so the ideologically pure rarely gain or keep public office.

You can't honestly use politicians to discredit conservative philosophy though. Few politicians have been truly conservative in a real sense. (For instance, much of Bush's "compassionate conservatism" was suspiciously similar to the old liberal big-government spending dressed up in new garb.)

Obama, on the other hand, has largely been remarkably true to his socialistic leftist big-government ideology.

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='Socrates' date='14 May 2010 - 10:30 AM' timestamp='1273858222' post='2110615']
What you've written makes no sense.


It should be noted that conservative positions on moral issues such as abortion and "gay marriage" are not "big government" as some like to claim.

Roe v. Wade was in fact a prime example of federal court tyranny, which by Supreme Court decree, the federal government usurped the power of the individual states and the people of those states to make laws concerning abortion, but made unlimited abortion the law of the land, in direct violation of the 10th amendment of the Constitution, which states that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
And I consider outlawing abortion no more "big government" than outlawing any other form of murder.

Likewise, officially recognizing "gay marriage" would not give the government less power, but more, as it would give the state power to confer recognition and benefits upon "unions" over which it did not previously have that power.



Yeah, make up your own definitions and you can make them say what you like.

It would be more accurate to describe politicians as sellouts (though some would use not so nice words).
Political power is won and kept by appealing to as many possible different individuals and interest groups, so the ideologically pure rarely gain or keep public office.

You can't honestly use politicians to discredit conservative philosophy though. Few politicians have been truly conservative in a real sense. (For instance, much of Bush's "compassionate conservatism" was suspiciously similar to the old liberal big-government spending dressed up in new garb.)

Obama, on the other hand, has largely been remarkably true to his socialistic leftist big-government ideology.
[/quote]

you know, not every problem with Conservative politicians can be blamed on them actually being liberal.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Didymus' date='14 May 2010 - 09:31 AM' timestamp='1273843911' post='2110538']
I'm really getting in to Phillip Blond's definitions of the debate. Liberals are both left and right. On one side, God doesn't belong in my personal life, infringing on my rights and entitlements, and on the other, God doesn't belong in my economic life, where I subject my faith to laws based on materialism and the consumer culture. Basically, a liberal is an individualist. They may believe in socialism or laissez faire economics.

The conservative loves tradition, virtue, and morality.

read this:
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2010/jun/01/00006/
[/quote]
Interesting and intelligent article (though I haven't had time to really digest it).

I don't think economic free markets are really the problem, but rather the fact that the market today is not truly free, but unduly and artificially controlled by centralized government power - chiefly the Federal Reserve Bank, which essentially sets government price controls in the financial market by controlling the interest rate and money supply, and by essentially creating money out of thin air to lend to business "too big to fail." This, not "unregulated markets" or "lack of government oversight," was the chief cause of the current economic crisis.
Blond seems to get at this some towards the end of his article though.

[quote]The conservative loves tradition, virtue, and morality.[/quote]
Russell Kirk, a founder of the American conservative movement, agreed.

[url="http://www.kirkcenter.org/kirk/ten-principles.html"]10 Conservative Principles[/url]

Edited May 14, 2010 by Socrates

[Socrates]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' date='14 May 2010 - 01:36 PM' timestamp='1273858574' post='2110619']
you know, not every problem with Conservative politicians can be blamed on them actually being liberal.
[/quote]
Didn't say they were, though I can think of precious few of them that can be blamed on adherence to conservative principles.