BF2S Forums [D&ST Political Slider 2010]

Uzique wrote:

i believe, in american usage at least, that it refers to the reintroduction of REAL liberalism (economically, for the most part) to an american partisan-politics system that had misappropriated the term and transformed it into an ugly misnomer. 'liberal' has been a dirty term - a pejorative - for a long time in america, despite not actually referring to any values remotely linked to classical liberalism. hence, the resurgence is a 'neo'-phenomenon.

We have a winner. Nicely done Uzi.

I don't think the term 'neo-liberal' will ever catch on over here though. We're content to call ourselves Libertarians

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2010-05-01 08:15:09)

Certainly, I was much more conservative when I first joined here, and then spent a good deal of time in a centrist area, but I'm probably now more towards the left, although I'd like to think I'm still towards the center. It's also interesting that in these 4 years here I have gone through that whole teenage period of your political beliefs changing, but also learned a lot more about many things from courses I've taken as well as people here.

Marconius wrote:

Haven't changed much.  Still quite left.  Someone has to balance out the right-wing nutjobs here. 

Balance? there are still more left wing nutjobs than right

ghettoperson wrote:

I do love it how Socialism = Hitler in the US.

Considering Fascism/Nazism is a form of socialism yes.

JohnG@lt wrote:

'Right' and 'Left' mean very little. Are you talking about economic or social policy? They aren't the same by any means. It's better to use the political compass concept with cardinal directions, North, East, South, West with variants in between.

Question is, who is who in directions? I'm not familiar with this concept

Last edited by War Man (2010-05-01 09:39:26)

Tilted left some.

I learned a lot about how others view America.

War Man wrote:

Marconius wrote:

Haven't changed much.  Still quite left.  Someone has to balance out the right-wing nutjobs here. 

Balance? there are still more left wing nutjobs than right

ghettoperson wrote:

I do love it how Socialism = Hitler in the US.

Considering Fascism/Nazism is a form of socialism yes.

Fascism is Authoritarianism. It's not really an economic concept except for the fact that the government's hand is involved in the market rather heavily. Keynes is usually the school of thought associated with fascism as he advocated government control and intervention in the market. So... it's capitalistic rather than redistributive, but it's nowhere near 'free'. Fascists were more centrist in nature in regards to economics.

War Man wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

'Right' and 'Left' mean very little. Are you talking about economic or social policy? They aren't the same by any means. It's better to use the political compass concept with cardinal directions, North, East, South, West with variants in between.

Question is, who is who in directions? I'm not familiar with this concept

Think of a compass and then assign North to Authoritarianism, South to Anarchy, East to Free Market economics and West to Redistributive economics. These are all the extreme ends of the spectrum so someone that is in the Northwest would resemble the ideas of Stalin, the Northeast would be your Neo-Conservatives, the Southeast would be Anarcho-Capitalists (or to a lesser extreme, libertarians as defined in America) and the Southwest would resemble the hippie communes of the 60s with democratic or committee leadership.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2010-05-01 09:48:33)

I go back and forth...  I think it all evens out to the middle.

I've always been left of center economically and more libertarian than authoritarian.

Unquestionably, I have become more cynical than before though.

JohnG@lt wrote:

Uzique wrote:

i believe, in american usage at least, that it refers to the reintroduction of REAL liberalism (economically, for the most part) to an american partisan-politics system that had misappropriated the term and transformed it into an ugly misnomer. 'liberal' has been a dirty term - a pejorative - for a long time in america, despite not actually referring to any values remotely linked to classical liberalism. hence, the resurgence is a 'neo'-phenomenon.

We have a winner. Nicely done Uzi.

I don't think the term 'neo-liberal' will ever catch on over here though. We're content to call ourselves Libertarians

"neo"-phenomenon??? everyone loves neo

read a fucking book lowing and stop masking your ignorance with the cranky old-man vibe, it's lame

yes. we live in the era of post- and neo- logisms. sorry if you can't keep up with current theoretical and academic trends.

i suggest you either DO A FUCKING RESEARCH or stop your pissing and moaning

face it: it's more confusing to keep using the 'old' terms without any prefixes, because their common-conception changes and public understanding shifts around so much, that in fact the word itself and terminology would lose all currency and semantic meaning. to use 'liberal' to describe an economic theory nowadays in the american political landscape connotes the usage from 1950-> onwards, and not the classical liberalism propounded by european philosophers, politicians and statesmen centuries before.

there, now ive debunked your whine... go away and leave out the next 3 pages of pointless quote-dialogue. thanks.

Last edited by Uzique (2010-05-01 12:00:51)

lowing wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

Went from moderate left to center to moderate left.

Influences: good stuff on here, newspapers, magazines (real ones like The Economist, not some shitty tabloid where morons give their two cents on politics), internets etc

the economist is pretty much neo-liberal... you swayed left?

neo-liberal?????????

Neo-liberal = favors free market economics

Neoconservative = similar, but with heavy emphasis on interventionist foreign policy

I learned people in this forum love to attach the term "NEO" to everything, in an attempt to appear more legit or as an adjective added unnecessarily to appear more potent or resolute in their standing. Not sure which

Uzique wrote:

face it: it's more confusing to keep using the 'old' terms without any prefixes, because their common-conception changes and public understanding shifts around so much, that in fact the word itself and terminology would lose all currency and semantic meaning. to use 'liberal' to describe an economic theory nowadays in the american political landscape connotes the usage from 1950-> onwards, and not the classical liberalism propounded by european philosophers, politicians and statesmen centuries before.

there, now ive debunked your whine... go away and leave out the next 3 pages of pointless quote-dialogue. thanks.

shut up. fuck off. thanks.

lowing wrote:

I learned people in this forum love to attach the term "NEO" to everything, in an attempt to appear more legit or as an adjective added unnecessarily to appear more potent or resolute in their standing. Not sure which

neonobodygivesafuck.

lowing wrote:

I learned people in this forum love to attach the term "NEO" to everything, in an attempt to appear more legit or as an adjective added unnecessarily to appear more potent or resolute in their standing. Not sure which

As Uzique said, the terms liberal and conservative themselves have been drastically altered over time. There's nothing liberal about being an American Liberal. Heck, in many cases, American Liberals are even more Authoritarian than Conservatives are. The term Libertarian was coined by people who were Classically Liberal anti-authoritarian, free market respecting individuals rather than the Populist, Authoritarian meaning that had been adopted by the American Liberals when they accepted Socialists into their ranks at the turn of the last century.


God, that paragraph was awful but I can't be assed to fix it. Hope I got my point across.