Why do you hate liberals and liberalism so much?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

To add something else to the mix to confuse matters - Neoliberalism

Neoliberalism is a pejorative label for an economic and political movement based on economic liberalism which has become increasingly important in international economic policy discussions from the 1970s onwards.

In its dominant international use, neoliberalism refers to a political-economic philosophy that de-emphasizes or rejects government intervention in the domestic economy. It focuses on free-market methods, fewer restrictions on business operations, and property rights. In foreign policy, neoliberalism favors the opening of foreign markets by political means, using diplomacy, economic pressure and, for some neoliberals, military might[1]. Opening of markets refers to free trade and an international division of labor. Neoliberalism generally favors multilateral political pressure through international organizations or treaty devices such as the WTO, World Bank and ADB. It promotes reducing the role of national governments to a minimum. Neoliberalism favors privatization over direct government intervention and production (such as Keynesianism), and measures success in overall economic gain. To improve efficiency and minimize unemployment, it strives to reject or mitigate labor policies such as minimum wage, and collective bargaining rights. It opposes socialism, protectionism, environmentalism, fair trade, and critics say it impedes democratic rule. Likewise, these critics argue that labor rights and social justice should have a priority in international relations and economics.[citation needed]

In its US usage, neoliberalism is associated with some of these positions such as support for free trade and welfare reform, but not with opposition to Keynesianism or environmentalism. In the American context, for example, economist Brad DeLong is a prominent defender of neoliberalism, although he is a Keynesian, supporter of income redistribution, and fierce critic of the Bush Administration. In US usage, neoliberalism ("new liberalism") is commonly associated with the Third Way, aka social-democracy under the New Public Management movement. Supporters of the US version of neoliberalism present it as a pragmatic position, focusing on "what works" and transcending debates between left and right, despite new liberalism's similitude to classical center-of-left economic policies (such as has been traditional to 20th century Canada). The overlapping of these usages can create considerable confusion. In international usage, President Ronald Reagan and the United States Republican Party are seen as leading proponents of neoliberalism. But Reagan was never described in this way in domestic US political discussion, where the term is most commonly applied to moderate Democrats like the Democratic Leadership Council.

Edited September 24, 2006 by erekose

[dalegg 143]

Many liberals advocate a greater degree of government interference in the free market, often in the form of anti-discrimination laws, civil service examinations, universal education, and progressive taxation. This philosophy frequently extends to a belief that the government should provide for a degree of general welfare, including Unemployment benefits for the poor, housing for the homeless, and medical care for the sick. Such publicly-funded initiatives and interferences in the market are rejected by modern advocates of classical liberalism, which emphasizes free private enterprise, individual property rights and freedom of contract; classical liberals hold that economic inequality, as arising naturally from competition in the free market, does not justify the violation of private property rights. However, modern advocates of classical liberalism do advocate a heavier taxation on the corporation, as opposed to the current trend of the burden of income tax resting on the shoulders of the individual worker, as did the early classical liberals.

I think the first modern liberals only thought they were liberals because they were probably democrats. They have since realized that they are "Progressives". Many Conservatives also confuse the two which is why they don't like them. When they hear what "Progressives" want, it sounds like Socialism, and no Red Blooded Capitalist Republican likes Socialism.

[homesick_american 1]

I vote Democrat and used to proudly label myself with the word 'liberal' but I'm loath to use it nowadays. It isn't because I'm ashamed of my beliefs; it's because I think I no longer share a lot of the beliefs of those who now call themselves 'liberals.'

For example, I don't give a damn if gays want to marry each other. Doesn't affect me. I was and still am against the war in Iraq. I support public education. I support a woman's right to choose. These are standard core liberal beliefs. However, I find myself repulsed by the moral relativism, anti-Americanism, and pro-Socialist tendencies of western European liberalism.

As we Western Europeans find ourselves repulsed by American Republicism Empire building. Can Europe have no opinion? Do we really have to cowtow to the US world order, there are other nations in this world you know. If you don't like Europe LEAVE

Oh, believe me...once they issue my husband's visa, we're a dot on the horizon. Want to come to my UK visa-burning party?

If I was to classify myself I would say I'm a old school anarchist-socialist-green leaning-fool.

Dime a dozen over here.

[Jenn! 918]

I found this article to be interesting:

Perverted, God-Hating Frenchies vs. Inbred, Sex-Obsessed Yokels

Why can't liberals and conservatives get along? Because they fundamentally misunderstand each other.

[homesick_american 1]

I found this article to be interesting:

Perverted, God-Hating Frenchies vs. Inbred, Sex-Obsessed Yokels

Why can't liberals and conservatives get along? Because they fundamentally misunderstand each other.

LOL, god-hating Frenchies!

Sort of off-topic...I once had someone on a gardening message board berate me because I referred to a herb as 'French tarragon' instead of 'Freedom tarragon.' True story.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I saw two people being interviewed on MSNBC this morning about the "classified intelligence report". They had two speakers - introduced by the anchor as "liberal" and "conservative" respectively. Neither apparently seemed to mind being labelled in that way, but it does create an impression that there are only two valid positions on the issue.

Simplistic assumptions create a simplistic view of the world.

Why can't liberals and conservatives get along? Because they fundamentally misunderstand each other.

Add to that there is nothing actually wrong with the philosophies themselves, its not simply about how they are applied to particular issues, but also how they are defined and presented. Hence Neoliberal / Economic liberalism is erroneously classed as "conservative", when it clearly isn't.

Edited September 24, 2006 by erekose

[Lewis 0]

To add something else to the mix to confuse matters - Neoliberalism

Neoliberalism is a pejorative label for an economic and political movement based on economic liberalism which has become increasingly important in international economic policy discussions from the 1970s onwards.

In its dominant international use, neoliberalism refers to a political-economic philosophy that de-emphasizes or rejects government intervention in the domestic economy. It focuses on free-market methods, fewer restrictions on business operations, and property rights. In foreign policy, neoliberalism favors the opening of foreign markets by political means, using diplomacy, economic pressure and, for some neoliberals, military might[1]. Opening of markets refers to free trade and an international division of labor. Neoliberalism generally favors multilateral political pressure through international organizations or treaty devices such as the WTO, World Bank and ADB. It promotes reducing the role of national governments to a minimum. Neoliberalism favors privatization over direct government intervention and production (such as Keynesianism), and measures success in overall economic gain. To improve efficiency and minimize unemployment, it strives to reject or mitigate labor policies such as minimum wage, and collective bargaining rights. It opposes socialism, protectionism, environmentalism, fair trade, and critics say it impedes democratic rule. Likewise, these critics argue that labor rights and social justice should have a priority in international relations and economics.[citation needed]

In its US usage, neoliberalism is associated with some of these positions such as support for free trade and welfare reform, but not with opposition to Keynesianism or environmentalism. In the American context, for example, economist Brad DeLong is a prominent defender of neoliberalism, although he is a Keynesian, supporter of income redistribution, and fierce critic of the Bush Administration. In US usage, neoliberalism ("new liberalism") is commonly associated with the Third Way, aka social-democracy under the New Public Management movement. Supporters of the US version of neoliberalism present it as a pragmatic position, focusing on "what works" and transcending debates between left and right, despite new liberalism's similitude to classical center-of-left economic policies (such as has been traditional to 20th century Canada). The overlapping of these usages can create considerable confusion. In international usage, President Ronald Reagan and the United States Republican Party are seen as leading proponents of neoliberalism. But Reagan was never described in this way in domestic US political discussion, where the term is most commonly applied to moderate Democrats like the Democratic Leadership Council.

That's an interesting definition, some Americans would never classify Reagan as anything close to a "liberal". The definition of the word liberal has obviously changed over the last few generations.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I found this article to be interesting:

Perverted, God-Hating Frenchies vs. Inbred, Sex-Obsessed Yokels

Why can't liberals and conservatives get along? Because they fundamentally misunderstand each other.

Excellent article, Jenn.

[Fischkoepfin 1]

To add something else to the mix to confuse matters - Neoliberalism

Neoliberalism is a pejorative label for an economic and political movement based on economic liberalism which has become increasingly important in international economic policy discussions from the 1970s onwards.

In its dominant international use, neoliberalism refers to a political-economic philosophy that de-emphasizes or rejects government intervention in the domestic economy. It focuses on free-market methods, fewer restrictions on business operations, and property rights. In foreign policy, neoliberalism favors the opening of foreign markets by political means, using diplomacy, economic pressure and, for some neoliberals, military might[1]. Opening of markets refers to free trade and an international division of labor. Neoliberalism generally favors multilateral political pressure through international organizations or treaty devices such as the WTO, World Bank and ADB. It promotes reducing the role of national governments to a minimum. Neoliberalism favors privatization over direct government intervention and production (such as Keynesianism), and measures success in overall economic gain. To improve efficiency and minimize unemployment, it strives to reject or mitigate labor policies such as minimum wage, and collective bargaining rights. It opposes socialism, protectionism, environmentalism, fair trade, and critics say it impedes democratic rule. Likewise, these critics argue that labor rights and social justice should have a priority in international relations and economics.[citation needed]

In its US usage, neoliberalism is associated with some of these positions such as support for free trade and welfare reform, but not with opposition to Keynesianism or environmentalism. In the American context, for example, economist Brad DeLong is a prominent defender of neoliberalism, although he is a Keynesian, supporter of income redistribution, and fierce critic of the Bush Administration. In US usage, neoliberalism ("new liberalism") is commonly associated with the Third Way, aka social-democracy under the New Public Management movement. Supporters of the US version of neoliberalism present it as a pragmatic position, focusing on "what works" and transcending debates between left and right, despite new liberalism's similitude to classical center-of-left economic policies (such as has been traditional to 20th century Canada). The overlapping of these usages can create considerable confusion. In international usage, President Ronald Reagan and the United States Republican Party are seen as leading proponents of neoliberalism. But Reagan was never described in this way in domestic US political discussion, where the term is most commonly applied to moderate Democrats like the Democratic Leadership Council.

Rather than more confusion, this brings more clarity as it highlights the different connotations of "liberal" that have already surfaced in this thread. Liberalism, outside the U.S., is often understood as economic or classical liberalism, and "neo-liberal" does not refer to any political party (see Europe where the EU is supervising the implementation of neo-liberalism in increasingly more areas thanks to almost 30 years of neoliberal politics in most member countries). In contrast, inside the US the term liberal is intrinsically tied with a non-conservative, socially oriented world-view; thus Reagan, while a paragon of neo-liberalism in the international sense and politically not that different from Clinton or Carter, stands outside this category.

It would be interesting to find out where this difference in terminology comes from...

[dalegg 143]

Rather than more confusion, this brings more clarity as it highlights the different connotations of "liberal" that have already surfaced in this thread. Liberalism, outside the U.S., is often understood as economic or classical liberalism, and "neo-liberal" does not refer to any political party (see Europe where the EU is supervising the implementation of neo-liberalism in increasingly more areas thanks to almost 30 years of neoliberal politics in most member countries). In contrast, inside the US the term liberal is intrinsically tied with a non-conservative, socially oriented world-view; thus Reagan, while a paragon of neo-liberalism in the international sense and politically not that different from Clinton or Carter, stands outside this category.

It would be interesting to find out where this difference in terminology comes from...

It comes from Rush Limbaugh.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

To add something else to the mix to confuse matters - Neoliberalism

Neoliberalism is a pejorative label for an economic and political movement based on economic liberalism which has become increasingly important in international economic policy discussions from the 1970s onwards.

In its dominant international use, neoliberalism refers to a political-economic philosophy that de-emphasizes or rejects government intervention in the domestic economy. It focuses on free-market methods, fewer restrictions on business operations, and property rights. In foreign policy, neoliberalism favors the opening of foreign markets by political means, using diplomacy, economic pressure and, for some neoliberals, military might[1]. Opening of markets refers to free trade and an international division of labor. Neoliberalism generally favors multilateral political pressure through international organizations or treaty devices such as the WTO, World Bank and ADB. It promotes reducing the role of national governments to a minimum. Neoliberalism favors privatization over direct government intervention and production (such as Keynesianism), and measures success in overall economic gain. To improve efficiency and minimize unemployment, it strives to reject or mitigate labor policies such as minimum wage, and collective bargaining rights. It opposes socialism, protectionism, environmentalism, fair trade, and critics say it impedes democratic rule. Likewise, these critics argue that labor rights and social justice should have a priority in international relations and economics.[citation needed]

In its US usage, neoliberalism is associated with some of these positions such as support for free trade and welfare reform, but not with opposition to Keynesianism or environmentalism. In the American context, for example, economist Brad DeLong is a prominent defender of neoliberalism, although he is a Keynesian, supporter of income redistribution, and fierce critic of the Bush Administration. In US usage, neoliberalism ("new liberalism") is commonly associated with the Third Way, aka social-democracy under the New Public Management movement. Supporters of the US version of neoliberalism present it as a pragmatic position, focusing on "what works" and transcending debates between left and right, despite new liberalism's similitude to classical center-of-left economic policies (such as has been traditional to 20th century Canada). The overlapping of these usages can create considerable confusion. In international usage, President Ronald Reagan and the United States Republican Party are seen as leading proponents of neoliberalism. But Reagan was never described in this way in domestic US political discussion, where the term is most commonly applied to moderate Democrats like the Democratic Leadership Council.

That's an interesting definition, some Americans would never classify Reagan as anything close to a "liberal". The definition of the word liberal has obviously changed over the last few generations.

They wouldn't classify W as "Liberal" either - but as we have seen, he promotes much of the same "pro-corporation" economic policies as did Reagan and Bush Sr.

Rather than more confusion, this brings more clarity as it highlights the different connotations of "liberal" that have already surfaced in this thread. Liberalism, outside the U.S., is often understood as economic or classical liberalism, and "neo-liberal" does not refer to any political party (see Europe where the EU is supervising the implementation of neo-liberalism in increasingly more areas thanks to almost 30 years of neoliberal politics in most member countries). In contrast, inside the US the term liberal is intrinsically tied with a non-conservative, socially oriented world-view; thus Reagan, while a paragon of neo-liberalism in the international sense and politically not that different from Clinton or Carter, stands outside this category.

It would be interesting to find out where this difference in terminology comes from...

It comes from Rush Limbaugh.

Sensationalist political commentators certainly don't help matters.

[Fischkoepfin 1]

Rather than more confusion, this brings more clarity as it highlights the different connotations of "liberal" that have already surfaced in this thread. Liberalism, outside the U.S., is often understood as economic or classical liberalism, and "neo-liberal" does not refer to any political party (see Europe where the EU is supervising the implementation of neo-liberalism in increasingly more areas thanks to almost 30 years of neoliberal politics in most member countries). In contrast, inside the US the term liberal is intrinsically tied with a non-conservative, socially oriented world-view; thus Reagan, while a paragon of neo-liberalism in the international sense and politically not that different from Clinton or Carter, stands outside this category.

It would be interesting to find out where this difference in terminology comes from...

It comes from Rush Limbaugh.

No, Rush Limbaugh is only responsible for the labeling of a group of people under that term; same goes for Ann Coulter and other pundits aiming at stigmatization of a poltically very diverse group. I think this is from the fifities or the sixties or even earlier.

[godsavethequeen 0]

Oh, believe me...once they issue my husband's visa, we're a dot on the horizon. Want to come to my UK visa-burning party?

If I was to classify myself I would say I'm a old school anarchist-socialist-green leaning-fool.

Dime a dozen over here.

Hey Homesick I'd love to celebrate your visa burning really I would. I believe borders between nations should be removed, maybe then we'll understand each other better. (Do not call me a hippy I hate Hippies).

and this made me smile... - from another topic -

Both my husband and I are:

* atheists

* mindful of the environment

* supportive of public education

* supportive of public transport

* in favor of renationalizing the UK's train system

* against the Iraq war

* against owning firearms

* against animal cruelty

* in favor of sustainable, ethical farming

Is that you Homesick??

This really sounds like an Anarchist - Socialistic - Green leaning fool to me. You just need to add Improve the NHS and we could start a new political party??

Good Luck to you and your hubby and Viva le Revolution.

[PlatyPius 5]

"Why do you hate liberals and liberalism so much?"

Because they suck.

[sparkofcreation 0]

I oppose liberalism on principle because it is pro-business and against social programs/ communities which I consider worth supporting. I also do not like the anti-environment agenda of liberalism but that falls under pro-business I suppose. Finally, while I do agree with liberalisms basic commitment to civil lliberties, I do not agree that individual rights should be extended to corporations as they are not individuals.

This comment is a joke, right? Someone please tell me this comment is a joke.