 |
| Source:C-SPAN- Conservative columnist George Will, at CPAC in 2010. |
From Polijam
Ronald Reagan a man I'm sure the great conservative author and columnist George Will admires, had a saying and I'm paraphrasing: "That it's not that people don't know thats the problem, but it's the amount that people don't know that's not true thats the problem." And the people who are dangerous are the people who who know so much thats not true and actually believe what they say. Representative Michele Bachmann, qualifies for the ladder.
George Will who I like for his sharp wit and intellect about politics, sports, and other issues qualifies for the former when it comes to liberalism. I'm sure Mr. Will is a genius about everything else he talks about, but when it comes to liberalism he's a raving moron. Sort of sounds like the drunk on the street corner who always has a bottle in his hand and perhaps is only sober when he's asleep, who feels the need to shoot his mouth out about everything that he knows nothing about pretending to be an expert on everything he talks about.
I'm a Liberal and damn proud of it that's how I describe my politics and it's always how I've been describing my politics since I started following politics in my late teens. I'm a Liberal Democrat because I believe in liberal democracy and thats what liberalism is about: liberty for the individual. Not because I believe in the state or that government's job is to make society equal.
Government's role is to insure that everyone has a good opportunity to reach their potential in life. Based on what they contribute to society, not to try to manage outcomes. And thats what separates Liberals from Social Democrats/Democratic Socialists, who believe the role of government is to insure that equality of outcome is insured in society. Not equality of opportunity, which are two different things.
What George Will is describing when he talks about liberalism, looks like socialism, which are different political ideology's from liberalism. I've never called myself a Progressive because today's definition of Progressive and perhaps in the past, even though the first eight letters in progressive spells progress and if Progressive is someone who believes in progress then I'm definitely a Progressive, but the popular definition of Progressive is someone who believes in using government to insure quality outcomes in society.
A so-called Someone today is someone who wants to use government to ensure equality of outcome in society. Which is different than equality of opportunity, that's a simple definition. But the best way to ensure equality of opportunity I believe as a Liberal, is through individual liberty. Empowering people through education and job training so they can have the individual liberty to reach their full-potential. If I was a Socialist, I would believe in using government by empowering it to ensure equality of outcomes.
Socialists, would raise taxes on people who are already doing well, to take care of the people, not empower the disadvantage, but take care of the people who are disadvantage. With high tax rates on the rich and probably middle class as well. And that's George Will's whole point about government dependence. To talk about liberalism, conservatism, libertarianism, progressivism whatever it may be, it helps to know what you're talking about.
Assholes, quite frankly speaking out of their ass. Liberalism and progressivism, and socialism, are three different political ideology's and not one in the same. And Conservatives especially (Christian-Nationalists, who are different from Conservatives) like to make Liberals look bad by trying to make us look like Socialists. But Liberals believe in defending liberty and expanding it for people who don't have it. People who are struggling have the opportunity to become independent and make their own way life.
Government's role is to insure that everyone has a good opportunity to reach their potential in life. Based on what they contribute to society, not to try to manage outcomes. And thats what separates Liberals from Social Democrats/Democratic Socialists, who believe the role of government is to insure that equality of outcome is insured in society. Not equality of opportunity, which are two different things.
What George Will is describing when he talks about liberalism, looks like socialism, which are different political ideology's from liberalism. I've never called myself a Progressive because today's definition of Progressive and perhaps in the past, even though the first eight letters in progressive spells progress and if Progressive is someone who believes in progress then I'm definitely a Progressive, but the popular definition of Progressive is someone who believes in using government to insure quality outcomes in society.
A so-called Someone today is someone who wants to use government to ensure equality of outcome in society. Which is different than equality of opportunity, that's a simple definition. But the best way to ensure equality of opportunity I believe as a Liberal, is through individual liberty. Empowering people through education and job training so they can have the individual liberty to reach their full-potential. If I was a Socialist, I would believe in using government by empowering it to ensure equality of outcomes.
Socialists, would raise taxes on people who are already doing well, to take care of the people, not empower the disadvantage, but take care of the people who are disadvantage. With high tax rates on the rich and probably middle class as well. And that's George Will's whole point about government dependence. To talk about liberalism, conservatism, libertarianism, progressivism whatever it may be, it helps to know what you're talking about.
Assholes, quite frankly speaking out of their ass. Liberalism and progressivism, and socialism, are three different political ideology's and not one in the same. And Conservatives especially (Christian-Nationalists, who are different from Conservatives) like to make Liberals look bad by trying to make us look like Socialists. But Liberals believe in defending liberty and expanding it for people who don't have it. People who are struggling have the opportunity to become independent and make their own way life.
This is what Liberals believes is the proper role of government. Not to take from the wealthy to manage the daily lives of people who aren't doing well. Or outlaw wealth all together so everyone is dependent on government. Which is what Socialists tend to push and are in favor of.
This is not a debate about government doing everything, or almost nothing. But instead a debate about government doing practically everything, versus limiting government to doing only what it does well. Including helping people who are snuggling achieve economic freedom for themselves.
This is not a debate about government doing everything, or almost nothing. But instead a debate about government doing practically everything, versus limiting government to doing only what it does well. Including helping people who are snuggling achieve economic freedom for themselves.
The Socialist versus Liberal debate, instead of Liberal vs Liberal, radical Liberals (who are actually Socialists and even illiberal) vs Center-Right Liberals (or Classical Liberals) who push for liberal democracy and a society where everyone has a quality opportunity to succeed in life on their own.
You can also see this post on WordPress.
