How do you define Liberal, Moderate, and Conservative?

a reply to: VulcanWerks

If your America is a constitutional republic vote for a Republican. For the people.
If your America is a democracy vote for a Democrat. Be a belligerant dissenter.

If your a moderate in America, mind your own business.

originally posted by: bladerunner44
a reply to: VulcanWerks

Just to keep it simple: A liberal sh1t$ in your pool, a moderate pisses in your pool, a conservative drowns them both.

Actually, being liberal, moderate, and conservative is appropriate at specific times for specific subjects.

I'm liberal when it comes to taking care of Americans...I'm conservative when it comes to saving unborn human lives.

a reply to: VulcanWerks

They are the "Other Guys"....

You forgot one - WOKE.
Those infected with the woke virus are left but aren't liberals.
They are a whole new breed of insane.

a reply to: Degradation33

Somewhat accurate except.....voting, is pointless. You have a One Party government in the US.

a reply to: Gothmog

What country do you live in ?
The pure definition of the words conservative vs. liberal shows the 2 are diametrically opposed .

In the country of the imaginary effeminate male,
I've still got my Dictionary;
everything else must seem as offensive as a pipe token | in comparison.

Conserve: 1. protect (something, especially something of environmental or cultural importance) from harm or destruction

Liberal Democracy: "is the combination of a liberal political philosophy that operates under a representative democratic form of government. It is characterized by elections between multiple distinct political parties, a separation of powers into different branches of government, the rule of law in everyday life as part of an open society, a market economy with private property, universal suffrage, and the equal protection of human rights, civil rights, civil liberties and political freedoms for all people." -Wikipedia

However:

Conservative: "...conservatives seek to promote a range of social institutions such as the nuclear family, organized religion, the military, property rights, and monarchy." -Wikipedia

Monarchy huh, maybe that explains MAGA, monarchy and all. So much better under a crown.

I guess you are right.

a reply to: VulcanWerks

Definitions change, some by accident, some deliberately.

I'm leaning more towards being a Constitutionalist because the Constitution hasn't changed.

Everyone against the Constitution would therefore, be a Marxist, or an advocate for less freedom and rights.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Constitution hasn't changed.

I bet you ignore the amendments. JK

a reply to: VulcanWerks

I wonder if we are all speaking the same language.

Not exactly the way I would have put it, but hey, we all should have a voice.

===========
Okay I'll spill.
There is one thing that I wish I had said to my dad. Even in hindsight though I don't think it would have made a difference.

We were on opposite sides of a rather contentious issue.
He said to me, "On my way here, I saw protesters on a bridge. I felt like getting out and protesting against them" with a sort of smug challenging expression.

I walked away, thinking "If what you think should be happening is happening then there is nothing for you to protest."

That old "truism" that democracies don't start wars turned out to be a canard.

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: DBCowboy

Constitution hasn't changed.

I bet you ignore the amendments. JK

lol

a reply to: pthena
My statement was the definition of liberal vs. conservative .
There is nothing in your post to successfully debate my statement .

I guess you are right.

No imagination(guessing) required .

a reply to: Gothmog

Recap:

I wrote:"It would be nice if Conservative meant interested in Conserving Liberal Democracy."

You wrote:"The pure definition of the words conservative vs. liberal shows the 2 are diametrically opposed"

Then I wrote out some Wiki definitions. And agreed with you.

My statement was the definition of liberal vs. conservative .

But you didn't give definitions, you merely declared them to be diametrically opposed. And I agreed.

Your post, to which I am responding to presently, seems quite superfluous.

too many in the partiuno

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

I would wager the majority of people would claim fence sitter status.

a reply to: pthena

representative democratic form of government

or . . . .. controlled representative controlled democratic controlled form of government

a reply to: WingDingLuey

We gotta keep some slim vision of the ideal alive, or all hope dies.
Check out the video I posted above.

a reply to: VulcanWerks

I'll reply to your question as asked and give you my personal working definitions.


Members of the Democratic Party - Corporate Figureheads funded by Big Tech, Big Entertainment and a section of Big Finance.

Members of the Republican Party - Corporate Figureheads founded by Big Extraction (Oil, Gas, Agriculture, etc). and sections of Big Finance.

(Big Finance is all about hedging their bets)

Registered Independences - not all but mostly tend to vote whatever they think is popular in the moment.

(Personally I think Political parties (or factions as the Framer's called them) should be abolished. Ad hoc parties developing more organically about the needs and viewpoints of the moment could work, having a life cycle of growth, fruiting (or not) and decay. It could be better than secret billionaire funding of, so called, grassroots movements)

Liberal - Directly from the dictionary - “Favoring reform, open to new ideas, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; not bound by traditional thinking; broad-minded. synonym: broad-minded.” In other word open to change and experiments. Always questioning the ‘party line’ (or the corporate line in fact).

Conservatives - Also from the dictionary - “tending or disposed to maintain existing views, conditions, or institutions; marked by moderation or caution: marked by or relating to traditional norms of taste, elegance, style, or manners. In orther words committed to maintaining the status quo.

Neo-Liberal - Government and Business working thogether to promote their joint agendas.

Neo-Conservative - Government and Business working thogether to promote their joint agendas.

Now to:

Libertarians - disinterested in anything other then pursuing their Corporate agenda with out any outside regulation.

Maga - Mostly manufactured (propagandized) unthoughtful rage machine against any social justice, progressive, or truly conservative issues including those that would benefit them personally.

A note about Anarchism - the true meaning of this pseudo-movement historically is to continually question everything with the intention of evolving understanding and practical practice. The popular understanding and usage of Anarchy is “without laws” (as in Libertarian) but not the actual foundation of Anarchism.

I think I covered most of your questions from my current understanding after many years in this particular brand of ‘Bread and Circuses’.

Great post.

a reply to: VulcanWerks

My reading of your question was really about worldview and not voting which is the more interesting question.

In the end, when it comes to voting, we are all voting for the lessor evil.

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme
[

Which I would associate with capital communism. (The type that want all the pay, just for making it to work to watch youtube). Typically with them doing less than the bare minimum of their job but expecting all the perks of doing the best.
You could also say the trophy generation.

Ah a new catagory CAPTIAL COMMUNISM or perhaps, IMO more accurately CAPITAL AUTHORITARIANISM. The way back macine's "owe everything to the company store" in a company town.

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: VulcanWerks

1. Insane
2. Spineless
3. Lacking Conviction

I'd turn that around a bit (and the generalization is appalling.

1. Spineless
2. Greedy
3. Confused