T Nation

Ban the Word Liberal

[quote]derek wrote:
Great point as always![/quote]

Strangely, except for recent Steven Harper style conservativism, the conservative party in Canada has always attracted me due to their fiscal responsibility and pro-business stance.

Unfortunately, from my point of view, recent conservatives in Canada have taken a play from the US and are putting socially conservative items into their agenda.

Except for criminal matters, the government should fuck off and let society shape itself how it wants to with respect to social issues.

So, amazing as it may seem, slapping that little liberal icon on me isn’t as fitting as you might think. Strangely, both within Canada and the US, there doesn’t seem to be a party that represents the socially liberal and fiscally conservative.

What the fuck is wrong with politics in North American these days?

However Derek, if that’s all you can effectively bring to the conversation, you just knock yourself out. I’d hate to deny you your little attempted jibes. It’s kind of amusing…

[quote]vroom wrote:

Except for criminal matters, the government should fuck off and let society shape itself how it wants to with respect to social issues.

However Derek, if that’s all you can effectively bring to the conversation, you just knock yourself out. I’d hate to deny you your little attempted jibes. It’s kind of amusing…[/quote]

I actually agree with your above statement (the first one). I’m pretty damn sick of over-reaching government intrusion into our lives.

I found that “attempted jibe” on Google images and it just makes me laugh even though it probably is not entirely acurate in describing you.

Again though, your sense of humor in these formums is quite lacking.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
There is nothing slanderous about the word liberal. Essentially, anyone living in the “Western” world that believes in the core principles of “liberty” (as in, freedom to pursue individual happiness) and freedom of thought, is a liberal.

On the other hand, I not sure the same thing can be said about a “neocon”–whatever the correct definition is. That is a label that probably only fits a certain few on the right.[/quote]

yup

[quote]derek wrote:
Again though, your sense of humor in these formums is quite lacking.[/quote]

Perhaps.

However, you have to realize that something people are actually doing and using in a non-humorous way is hard to then see as humorous just because a different person does the same thing.

For example, just for kicks, go wear a white sheet and have a cross burning at your black friend’s house as a joke. See how many people are laughing.

You find your humor, I’ll find mine…

That was a joke, right?

[quote]vroom wrote:

For example, just for kicks, go wear a white sheet and have a cross burning at your black friend’s house as a joke. See how many people are laughing.

You find your humor, I’ll find mine…[/quote]

Yes, dressing up like a murderous, evil Klansman at a black person’s house is just like posting that silly “Canadian Liberal” picture on an internet forum.

And all this time I thought analogies should make sense. Go figure.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:

A Neocon, by actual stance, is a term sed to descrbe the new breed of social conservatives whose support stems from the evangelical Christian community. They are vehemently Pro-life/Anti-choice, Anti-Euthanasia, and Anti-Gay Marriage/Union/Adopting/Ect… In 2000, Bush won with his main support being from the neo-con community.

It really doesn’t describe most of the people the term is attached to.

At least, this is my understanding. Someone wanna correct me if I’m wrong here?

Not even close. Neoconservatives were distinguished by their views on foreign policy - and in fact were “reformed” liberals and socialists originally who emerged from the Cold War as hawks because they were “liberals mugged by reality”. As such, many neoconservatives were actually less socially “conservative” than other conservatives, especially on domestic policy issues.

As Beowulf demonstrated, it has become a cheap slur unmoored from its original meaning - just like Liberal. “Neocon” means nothing, other than the fact that user of it has no idea what the hell he is talking about.[/quote]

Thanks for the update. I really had no idea, and I promise to try and use the term more accurately now.

IS their a word I can use to describe the above? Evangelical, Social-issue, supported candidates?

And please, it’s Beowolf, with an “o” :). Different characters.

[quote]derek wrote:
Yes, dressing up like a murderous, evil Klansman at a black person’s house is just like posting that silly “Canadian Liberal” picture on an internet forum.

And all this time I thought analogies should make sense. Go figure.[/quote]

I knew that post was coming…

I’m not trying to say they are similar events. Why would I? Don’t be an idiot – even though this is such a common tactic around these parts.

The point to take away from the example is obviously that there can be issues surrounding a “joke” that cause it to cease being funny. The cross burning example is so blatant even you can grasp the idea!

If you had never heard of the KKK and had never been exposed to race relations conflicts, you wouldn’t realize that you were “dressing up like a murderous, evil Klansman” would you?

So, although trivial in comparison, your clever little liberal branding campaign has it’s surrounding little issues that cause it to be more sad or pathetic than funny.

By all means, keep doing it!

[quote]vroom wrote:
derek wrote:
Yes, dressing up like a murderous, evil Klansman at a black person’s house is just like posting that silly “Canadian Liberal” picture on an internet forum.

And all this time I thought analogies should make sense. Go figure.

I knew that post was coming…

I’m not trying to say they are similar events. Why would I? Don’t be an idiot – even though this is such a common tactic around these parts.

The point to take away from the example is obviously that there can be issues surrounding a “joke” that cause it to cease being funny. The cross burning example is so blatant even you can grasp the idea!

If you had never heard of the KKK and had never been exposed to race relations conflicts, you wouldn’t realize that you were “dressing up like a murderous, evil Klansman” would you?

So, although trivial in comparison, your clever little liberal branding campaign has it’s surrounding little issues that cause it to be more sad or pathetic than funny.

By all means, keep doing it![/quote]

So, are you always this funny?

You can insult me all you like as long as you realize I’m getting a kick out of your ever-funereal reaction.

[quote]vroom wrote:

By all means, keep doing it![/quote]

That’s the plan!

As I’ve pointed out on a number of occasions, we haven’t got any true, bonafide libs here on T-Nation. The neocons are ranting against spooks…

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
As I’ve pointed out on a number of occasions, we haven’t got any true, bonafide libs here on T-Nation. The neocons are ranting against spooks…[/quote]

Nor do we have any neocons.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
As I’ve pointed out on a number of occasions, we haven’t got any true, bonafide libs here on T-Nation. The neocons are ranting against spooks…

Nor do we have any neocons.[/quote]

Damn straight.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
As I’ve pointed out on a number of occasions, we haven’t got any true, bonafide libs here on T-Nation. The neocons are ranting against spooks…

Nor do we have any neocons.[/quote]

That’s absolutely false. You and the rest of the gang have repeatedly demonstrated your conviction that the United States is the greatest force for good in the world and that the U.S. military is the noble enforcer of benevolent world hegemony, wherever it may go and whomever it attacks. Such convictions form the basic tenets of neocon ideology.

The people you accuse of being “liberals”, on the other hand, have little or no affiliation with liberal ideology. In fact, nearly all of them espouse unmistakably conservative positions on most subjects, such as the role of government in society and the economy.

It’s perfectly accurate to call you neocons. It’s not accurate for you to call us liberals, for the most part.

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
As I’ve pointed out on a number of occasions, we haven’t got any true, bonafide libs here on T-Nation. The neocons are ranting against spooks…

Nor do we have any neocons.

That’s absolutely false. You and the rest of the gang have repeatedly demonstrated your conviction that the United States is the greatest force for good in the world and that the U.S. military is the noble enforcer of benevolent world hegemony, wherever it may go and whomever it attacks. Such convictions form the basic tenets of neocon ideology.

The people you accuse of being “liberals”, on the other hand, have little or no affiliation with liberal ideology. In fact, nearly all of them espouse unmistakably conservative positions on most subjects, such as the role of government in society and the economy.

It’s perfectly accurate to call you neocons. It’s not accurate for you to call us liberals, for the most part.[/quote]

A neo-con is not some kind of super conservative. A neo-con holds what would normally be called liberal positions in many domestic and societal roles but is hawkish on foreign policy. It applies to a small group of anti-war libs that realized the error of their ways.

If you were nearly as well versed on the subject as you think you are you would already know this.

Or you could have already read this very thread where this subject has already been discussed.

I’m well aware of it and have written about it before, but still, that amounts to a cop-out. Foreign policy is the most substantial political issue on this board and in the country today. There is no longer any legitimate disagreement between the two sides over government spending and domestic intervention.

If it makes you happy I’ll gladly revise my statement to say that “this board is dominated by people who subscribe to a neocon doctrine of foreign policy”.

Neo-conservatism is more of a foreign policy doctrine than a general political one. Today, all you see in the political mainstream is left and right wing variations of neocons. There is no true “antiwar” movement except in the fringe libertarian/paleocon element.

If this board was more conservative than neo, I’d venture there’d be more interest in the Ron Paul candidacy threads that have been posted.