I need another word for Liberal

[LittleLightShining]

I've written a letter to endorse my friend for state senate here in Vermont. I'm fairly pleased with it except for one part, which is bolded below. I need a better word than "Liberals". I don't think it is an accurate description of the type of people I mean but I still want people to understand my point. I do not want to offend or alienate those folks who are true, classical Liberals.


To the editor,

If Vermonters want change, they must go into the voting booths with a singular purpose—to put more Republicans into the state House and Senate. People complain about the loss of jobs, the lack of affordable housing, high taxes and the state of our ever-more-expensive schools. What a lot of them fail to see is that this is a result of decades of control by the Democrats.

The economic crisis that is looming over not just America, but the world, is wreaking havoc on states like California and Massachusetts. Like both of those states, Vermont has been taken over by Liberals. These people came here because they liked it and immediately set to work transforming it into a socialist paradise. They have gentrified our working landscape and made it prohibitively expensive to live and do business here. Can we trust the Democrats with our money any longer? When the crisis hits Vermont we will need legislators who will not waste time and taxpayer money with study committees and pet projects.

John Gilligan is running alongside incumbent Republicans Bill Doyle and Phil Scott for state Senate and I believe he has the kind of experience and vision that Vermont desperately needs. After graduating from St. Michael’s College with a degree in economics he joined the Air Force and worked as a logistics officer. He then spent 27 years in state government as an economist and purchasing agent. His entire career has been focused on fiscal accountability and responsibility. John Gilligan understands that throwing taxpayer money at a problem rarely solves it.

We need representation in the statehouse from people like John Gilligan who will safeguard every penny of our money and focus on the real issues— developing cost-effective and safe energy solutions; encouraging entrepreneurship and job creation; protecting our children by passing Jessica’s Law for Vermont; giving parents, not the NEA, control of their children’s education; and abiding by our Constitution so that our rights to free speech, worship, bear arms, and privacy remain intact.

John Gilligan has remained active in the community during his retirement years. He is steadfast and trustworthy, reliable and direct, but he also has that rare quality of being a great listener. He truly believes that it is essential for people on both sides of an issue to be polite in order for that discussion to be meaningful. He is meticulous when it comes to doing research on a subject and when he does not have all the facts, diligently makes an effort to educate himself. Please join me in voting for John Gilligan-- a real and genuine individual who will scrupulously represent the people of Washington County.

[FrankRep]

- Socialists
- Collectivists
- Big government supporters

[LibertyEagle]

Statists

[raystone]

deficit spenders

[RickyJ]

Vermont is nice? Now that I am surprised about.

Just call them Democrats. If not that, then socialists or communists. I don't see anything wrong with calling then liberal though.

[LittleLightShining]

- Socialists
- Collectivists
- Big government supportersThanks, is this better? Do you think it sends a message that people (regular people) will get?



The economic crisis that is looming over not just America, but the world, is wreaking havoc on states like California and Massachusetts. Like both of those states, Vermont has been taken over by socialist Democrats. These people came here because they liked it and immediately set to work transforming it into a socialist paradise. They have gentrified our working landscape and made it prohibitively expensive to live and do business here. Can we trust them with our money any longer? When the crisis hits Vermont we will need legislators who will not waste time and taxpayer money with study committees and pet projects.

Are there parts of this letter that are redundant or could be left out or worded in another way? It's a little too long to publish.

[Dary]

Leftists ?

[AmericasLastHope]

Neocons.

[Jeremy]

They usually like to call themselves progressives too I believe. Works better too...

[JosephTheLibertarian]

I've written a letter to endorse my friend for state senate here in Vermont. I'm fairly pleased with it except for one part, which is bolded below. I need a better word than "Liberals". I don't think it is an accurate description of the type of people I mean but I still want people to understand my point. I do not want to offend or alienate those folks who are true, classical Liberals.

communist

[LittleLightShining]

They usually like to call themselves progressives too I believe. Works better too...We have a fairly active Progressive party here but they are not the ones who have wreaked havoc on the state.



The economic crisis that is looming over not just America, but the world, is wreaking havoc on states like California and Massachusetts. Like both of those states, Vermont has been taken over by socialist Democrats. These people came here because they liked it and immediately set to work transforming it into a socialist paradise. They have gentrified our working landscape and made it prohibitively expensive to live and do business here. Can we trust these big government bureaucrats with our money any longer? When the crisis hits Vermont we will need legislators who will not waste time and taxpayer money with study committees and pet projects.

[Jeremy]

then just call them statists

idk

[revolutionman]

Progressives

[lucius]

utopian dreamers

[Dary]

Assholes.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

cum guzzlers

[acptulsa]

Nanny-state spenders. People who think government is the solution to any problem. Blue-staters. Kennedy liberals. Jimmy Carter liberals. Guns-and-butter liberals. Defecit spenders (did someone already suggest that? If so, *applause*). Fans of growth in government. Tax-and-spend types. Big government blue voters. Neo-libs. Beltway boosters. Town Hall Tyrants.

See anything you like?

[LittleLightShining]

Assholes.Hehe :D I don't think they'll print that.


Nanny-state spenders. People who think government is the solution to any problem. Blue-staters. Kennedy liberals. Jimmy Carter liberals. Guns-and-butter liberals. Defecit spenders (did someone already suggest that? If so, *applause*). Fans of growth in government. Tax-and-spend types. Big government blue voters. Neo-libs. Beltway boosters. Town Hall Tyrants.

See anything you like? I like Neo-libs. It would be my first choice, actually, but it's not common enough in the vernacular yet. I can't use deficit spenders because they don't really do that. What they do is rob money from one trust fund to pay for another program, or they mandate programs without funding them.

How's this?

The economic crisis that is looming over not just America, but the world, is wreaking havoc on states like California and Massachusetts. Like both of those states, Vermont has been taken over by neo-Liberal tax-and-spenders. These people came here because they liked it and immediately set to work transforming it into a socialist paradise. They have gentrified our working landscape and made it prohibitively expensive to live and do business here. Can we trust these big government bureaucrats with our money any longer? When the crisis hits Vermont we will need legislators who will not waste time and taxpayer money with study committees and pet projects.
And the letter itself-- does it make you want to vote for John Gilligan?

[LandonCook]

Leaches?

[acptulsa]

The Republican brand is so thoroughly tarnished these days, I'd be tempted to rework the opening for broader appeal.

If Vermonters want change, they must go into the voting booths with a singular purpose—to put genuine conservatives into the state House and Senate. People complain about the loss of jobs, the lack of affordable housing, high taxes and the state of our ever-more-expensive schools. What a lot of them fail to see is that this is a result of decades of control by the Democrats. We need true, old-fashioned fiscal responsibility in Montpelier.

[rprprs]

How about the "extreme left", or "proponents of the extreme left"? This may be less likely to offend independently-minded Democrats or classical liberals.

Also, If I were writing this, I might consider qualifying the term "socialist paradise". I know what you mean, but I think crediting them with transforming the state into an actual "paradise" (even a socialist one) gives them too much credit. You could mitigate this somewhat by adding: "their version of..", or "their vision of.." (a socialist paradise.) I know it's a fine distinction but, I think, an important one.

[Jeremy]

No, not neo-liberal... that has a different meaning. It's not like neocon

[JosephTheLibertarian]

poon drinkers

[LittleLightShining]

The Republican brand is so thoroughly tarnished these days, I'd be tempted to rework the opening for broader appeal.

If Vermonters want change, they must go into the voting booths with a singular purpose—to put genuine conservatives into the state House and Senate. People complain about the loss of jobs, the lack of affordable housing, high taxes and the state of our ever-more-expensive schools. What a lot of them fail to see is that this is a result of decades of control by the Democrats. We need true, old-fashioned fiscal responsibility in Montpelier.



How about the "extreme left", or "proponents of the extreme left"? This may be less likely to offend independently-minded Democrats or classical liberals.

Also, If I were writing this, I might consider qualifying the term "socialist paradise". I know what you mean, but I think crediting them with transforming the state into an actual "paradise" (even a socialist one) gives them too much credit. You could mitigate this somewhat by adding: "their version of..", or "their vision of.." (a socialist paradise.) I know it's a fine distinction but, I think, an important one.


Between the help I've gotten on this thread and elsewhere, here's where I'm at:


To the editor,

If Vermonters want change, they must go into the voting booths with a singular purpose—to put genuine conservatives into the state House and Senate. People complain about the loss of jobs, the lack of affordable housing, high taxes and the state of our ever-more-expensive schools. What a lot of them fail to see is that this is a result of decades of control by the Democrats. We need true, old-fashioned fiscal responsibility in Montpelier.

The economic crisis that is looming over not just America, but the world, is wreaking havoc on states like California and Massachusetts. Like both of those states, Vermont has become a bastion of statist populism, overtaken by extreme-left utopian dreamers who, although they mean well, are woefully incapable of financially preserving our cherished state. They have gentrified our working landscape and made it prohibitively expensive to live and do business here. When the crisis hits Vermont we will need legislators who will not waste time and taxpayer money with study committees and pet projects.

John Gilligan is running alongside incumbent Republicans Bill Doyle and Phil Scott for state Senate and I believe he has the kind of experience and vision that Vermont desperately needs. After graduating from St. Michael’s College with a degree in economics he joined the Air Force and worked as a logistics officer. He then spent 27 years in state government as an economist and purchasing agent. His entire career has been focused on fiscal accountability and responsibility. John Gilligan understands that throwing taxpayer money at a problem rarely solves it.

We need representation in the statehouse from people like John Gilligan who will safeguard every penny of our money and focus on the real issues— developing cost-effective and safe energy solutions; encouraging entrepreneurship and job creation; protecting our children by passing Jessica’s Law for Vermont; giving parents, not the NEA, control of their children’s education; and abiding by our Constitution so that our rights to free speech, worship, bear arms, and privacy remain intact.

John Gilligan has remained active in the community during his retirement. He is steadfast and trustworthy, reliable and direct, but he also has that rare quality of being a great listener. He truly believes that it is essential for people on both sides of an issue to be polite in order for that discussion to be meaningful. He is meticulous when it comes to researching a subject and when he does not have all the facts, diligently makes an effort to educate himself. Please join me in voting for John Gilligan-- a real and genuine individual who will scrupulously represent the people of Washington County.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

liberals = used pessary lickers

[acptulsa]

At the end of the third paragraph, I'd be tempted to add "...blindly throwing money at..."

I'm estimating between 450 and 500 words. Will that fly?

[LittleLightShining]

At the end of the third paragraph, I'd be tempted to add "...blindly throwing money at..."

I'm estimating between 450 and 500 words. Will that fly?I like that.

And no, the letter is way too long. As you well know I have a hard time writing short letters. I think his experience is relevant, but is it too much? What can I possibly cut to make it coherent and informative?

[acptulsa]

I like that.

And no, the letter is way too long. As you well know I have a hard time writing short letters. I think his experience is relevant, but is it too much? What can I possibly cut to make it coherent and informative?

Well, it's more than good enough and readable enough for them to either make an exception or trim it down themselves. Of course, it's no more fun to see your handiwork sliced up than to do it yourself, but I think there's a good chance for it to run en toto--especially if they have readers complaining about their lack of balance at the moment.

[werdd]

waiting for kade to enter the thread

[LittleLightShining]

waiting for kade to enter the thread
I actually pm'ed Kade with this question last night and got his feedback a little while ago-- which I used (albeit not in its entirety). I was too impatient today to wait for his reply so I started the thread.

I'm hoping that the papers will relax the standards when it comes to letters in support of candidates. Then again, my letter may be lost in a sea of endorsements.

[Join The Paul Side]

"I need another word for Liberal "


Have you tried.....Shit For Brains? :rolleyes:

[acptulsa]

"I need another word for Liberal "


Have you tried.....Shit For Brains? :rolleyes:

Well, now. I need to attract people to come vote. I think I'll stand at the door to my precinct with a cattle prod.

I'll see your :rolleyes: and raise you :rolleyes:

[tonesforjonesbones]

Loons
Communists
Asshats

[cheapseats]

If Vermonters want change, they must go into the voting booths with a singular purpose—to put genuine conservatives into the state House and Senate. People complain about the loss of jobs, the lack of affordable housing, high taxes and the state of our ever-more-expensive schools. What a lot of them fail to see is that this is a result of decades of control by the Democrats. We need true, old-fashioned fiscal responsibility in Montpelier.

vs. ...to restore Reason to the state House and Senate. You are as apt to have a liberal Democrat as a conservative Republican open the letter. Not all Democrats are fiscal nincompoops any more than all Republicans are prudent.

vs. ...result of decades of control by Democrats whose social principles are not tethered by financial integrity.



The economic crisis that is looming over not just America, but the world, is wreaking havoc on states like California and Massachusetts. Like both of those states, Vermont has become a bastion of statist populism, overtaken by extreme-left utopian dreamers who, although they mean well, are woefully incapable of financially preserving our cherished state. They have gentrified our working landscape and made it prohibitively expensive to live and do business here. When the crisis hits Vermont we will need legislators who will not waste time and taxpayer money with study committees and pet projects.

Uncommon terminology.

vs. a bastion of Tax & Spend Do-Gooders whose financial recklessness would bankrupt our cherished state. Their notions of gentrification will render our workplaces and living spaces prohibitively expensive, a lush landscape for Limousine Liberals who will demand additional tax revenue to support their courtly lifestyles. As the economic crisis worsens, and its impacts on the individual states become more severe, Vermont will need...



John Gilligan is running alongside incumbent Republicans Bill Doyle and Phil Scott for state Senate. A child would understand that incumbents got us where we are today.

After graduating from St. Michael’s College with a degree in economics, John Gilligan joined the Air Force and worked as a logistics officer. He then spent 27 years in state government as an economist and purchasing agent. His entire career has been focused on fiscal accountability and responsibility. John Gilligan "gets it" that throwing more taxpayer money at a problem, without addressing the core problem, just makes it a more expensive problem. I believe that John Gilligan has the kind of experience and vision that Vermont desperately needs.


We need representation in the statehouse from people like John Gilligan who will safeguard every penny of our money and focus on the real issues— developing cost-effective and safe energy solutions; encouraging entrepreneurship and job creation; protecting our children by passing Jessica’s Law for Vermont; giving parents, not the NEA, control of their children’s education; and abiding by our Constitution so that our rights to free speech, worship, bear arms, and privacy remain intact.


I don't know Vermont folk but, generally speaking, dissing public education and harping on weapons doesn't play in Peoria. The deployment of U.S. troops on U.S. soil should be enough to disabuse anyone of the idea of surrendering the right to bear arms. I wonder if you are not better off to go generic.

e.g. ...from John Gilligan and others who will safeguard both our hard-earned pennies and our hard-won principles, who will focus on down-to-earth issues instead of pie-in-the-sky wish lists. This is meat and potatoes time, not cake and ice cream.

[LittleLightShining]

A lot of you are missing the point here. The true meaning of a classical Liberal is more in tune with libertarianism than the new neo-con definition of Liberal. You've fallen into the trap that I am deliberately trying not to set.

[Join The Paul Side]

Well, now. I need to attract people to come vote. I think I'll stand at the door to my precinct with a cattle prod.

I'll see your :rolleyes: and raise you :rolleyes:

:D

[georgiaboy]

McCain voters

[cheapseats]

A lot of you are missing the point here. The true meaning of a classical Liberal is more in tune with libertarianism than the new neo-con definition of Liberal. You've fallen into the trap that I am deliberately trying not to set.

A lot of people are missing a lot of points because everyone is slapping labels on stuff, without consensus as to meaning. Labels are a lot like sound bytes, only typed.

[georgiaboy]

A lot of people are missing a lot of points because everyone is slapping labels on stuff, without consensus as to meaning. Labels are a lot like sound bytes, only typed.

completely agree. better to use words that point people in the direction to think than assume people understand what you mean by a particular label.

With so many people of all stripes angry about the recent bailouts, it's obvious your message has a chance of resonating with a great swath of folks. If you point out the bad behaviors and qualities while avoiding labels, you have a much better opportunity to gain a wider acceptance of the message.

[georgiaboy]

Uncommon terminology.

vs. a bastion of Tax & Spend Do-Gooders whose financial recklessness would bankrupt our cherished state. Their notions of gentrification will render our workplaces and living spaces prohibitively expensive, a lush landscape for Limousine Liberals who will demand additional tax revenue to support their courtly lifestyles. As the economic crisis worsens, and its impacts on the individual states become more severe, Vermont will need...



"Do-Gooders" - not the best choice. How about "Tax & Spenders", or "Tax & Spend Bleeding Hearts", or "Tax & Spend Manipulators", "Tax & Spend Nannies", ...




I don't know Vermont folk but, generally speaking, dissing public education and harping on weapons doesn't play in Peoria. The deployment of U.S. troops on U.S. soil should be enough to disabuse anyone of the idea of surrendering the right to bear arms. I wonder if you are not better off to go generic.

e.g. ...from John Gilligan and others who will safeguard both our hard-earned pennies and our hard-won principles, who will focus on down-to-earth issues instead of pie-in-the-sky wish lists. This is meat and potatoes time, not cake and ice cream.

Yes.

[LittleLightShining]

vs. ...to restore Reason to the state House and Senate. You are as apt to have a liberal Democrat as a conservative Republican open the letter. Not all Democrats are fiscal nincompoops any more than all Republicans are prudent. Very true.


vs. ...result of decades of control by Democrats whose social principles are not tethered by financial integrity.
You're right but the phrasing is too long for the newspaper.




Uncommon terminology.For the masses, yes. I think you have a point.


vs. a bastion of Tax & Spend Do-Gooders whose financial recklessness would bankrupt our cherished state. Their notions of gentrification will render our workplaces and living spaces prohibitively expensive, a lush landscape for Limousine Liberals who will demand additional tax revenue to support their courtly lifestyles. As the economic crisis worsens, and its impacts on the individual states become more severe, Vermont will need...I like the bolded. Cuts to the chase and it's shorter than what I had. The rest of the paragraph, though true, is not essential.



A child would understand that incumbents got us where we are today.You would think, but the fact is that in Vermont the Republicans in the legislature are a very small minority-- especially in the state Senate.


John Gilligan "gets it" that throwing more taxpayer money at a problem, without addressing the core problem, just makes it a more expensive problem. I believe that John Gilligan has the kind of experience and vision that Vermont desperately needs. Like it but changed "core problem" to "core issue."




I don't know Vermont folk but, generally speaking, dissing public education and harping on weapons doesn't play in Peoria. The deployment of U.S. troops on U.S. soil should be enough to disabuse anyone of the idea of surrendering the right to bear arms. I wonder if you are not better off to go generic.Well, public education here is a major issue because of the method of funding the system-- property taxes. The education funding law is also very socialistic in that instead of leaving the funding to the towns a statewide fund was created. It's very complicated and a lot of people have problems with it. People who own second homes in the state pay more money for education via their property taxes than primary residence owners. My grandparents own a second home here and their school taxes are more expensive than the total property taxes I pay on my primary residence.


e.g. ...from John Gilligan and others who will safeguard both our hard-earned pennies and our hard-won principles, who will focus on down-to-earth issues instead of pie-in-the-sky wish lists. This is meat and potatoes time, not cake and ice cream.I like this, too.

The following is now at 437 words. Most papers have a 250 word limit :(


To the editor,

If Vermonters want change, they must go into the voting booths with a singular purpose—to put genuine conservatives into the state House and Senate. People complain about the loss of jobs, the lack of affordable housing, high taxes and the state of our ever-more-expensive schools. What a lot of them fail to see is that this is a result of decades of control by the Democrats. We need true, old-fashioned fiscal responsibility in Montpelier.

The economic crisis that is looming over not just America, but the world, is wreaking havoc on states like California and Massachusetts. Like both of those states, Vermont has become a bastion of Tax & Spend Do-Gooders whose financial recklessness would bankrupt our cherished state. They have gentrified our working landscape and made it prohibitively expensive to live and do business here. When the economic crisis really hits Vermont we will need legislators who will not waste time and taxpayer money with study committees and pet projects.

John Gilligan is running alongside incumbent Republicans Bill Doyle and Phil Scott for state Senate. After graduating from St. Michael’s College with a degree in economics he joined the Air Force and worked as a logistics officer. He then spent 27 years in state government as an economist and purchasing agent. His entire career has been focused on fiscal accountability and responsibility. John Gilligan "gets it" that throwing more taxpayer money at a problem, without addressing the core issue, just makes it a more expensive problem. I believe that John Gilligan has the kind of experience and vision that Vermont desperately needs.

We need representation in the statehouse from people from John Gilligan and others who will safeguard both our hard-earned pennies and our hard-won principles and who will focus on down-to-earth issues instead of pie-in-the-sky wish lists. This is meat and potatoes time, not cake and ice cream.

John Gilligan has remained active in the community during his retirement. He is steadfast and trustworthy, reliable and direct, but he also has that rare quality of being a great listener. He truly believes that it is essential for people on both sides of an issue to be polite in order for that discussion to be meaningful. He is meticulous when it comes to researching a subject and when he does not have all the facts, diligently makes an effort to educate himself. Please join me in voting for John Gilligan-- a real and genuine individual who will scrupulously represent the people of Washington County.

Should I edit out the bolded above and add in the blue?

[HOLLYWOOD]

Liberals =

Sprinkler Heads

(They repetitiously spew in all directions, non-stop)

[Conza88]

A lot of you are missing the point here. The true meaning of a classical Liberal is more in tune with libertarianism than the new neo-con definition of Liberal. You've fallen into the trap that I am deliberately trying not to set.

Yeah, but according to Kade there is no such thing as a classical liberal. You can only be a modern liberal. :rolleyes: Which in a sense is correct, i.e you'd roughly be a libertarian as a classical liberal.. and as a modern liberal, you'd be terminologically associated with socialist scum.. I guess that's just Kade's "target" complex kicking in...

[Kade]

The concept of liberalism is intentionally corrupted by authoritative powers because there does not exist another concept or banner philosophy that people who are against authority can hold onto. They have successfully destroyed it in the minds of the serfdom. The Bushes, Cheney, Reagan, all the Neo-con elite.

Those that continue to allow the word to be used by themselves, instead of just pundits in this manner, are hurting their own movement. Especially if you believe in the philosophical foundation of liberalism, which most of you, unbeknown to yourselves, do.

Let me repeat this. If you believe that liberalism is what corrupted power says it is you are brainwashed.

Do you understand this, am I coming through to you? Liberalism is associated with negative words, like socialism, to erode YOUR freedoms. People also don't like the word "anarchy", because it too, has been corrupted.

This corruption however has failed. The intellectual elite of all countries, still adhere to the principles of liberalism, as it is generally understood, as a philosophy of individual freedom.

You are pawns. When you realize this, and defend it yourselves, you will see what you should be smart enough to see.

If you need more clarification, remember my words. Start by repeating the word to yourself, and reminding yourself where you heard it used...

Stop watching Fox News. Stop reading the totalitarian literature of the mid 1900s.

Liberalism is all we have left. When the last liberal is destroyed, you will not know. Instead, you will be uttering and thinking about the last eponymous line from 1984: "He loved Big Brother".

[parke]

commie, big government loving, thieving, c*cksucking bastards.

[Kade]

commie, big government loving, thieving, c*cksucking bastards.

Helpful.

[LittleLightShining]

Sometimes I wonder if people read through a thread.

Anyway, thank you to all who gave thoughtful replies and I appreciate the critiques and help. I think I have the letter where I want it and hopefully it will be published.

[RonPaulVolunteer]

I prefer anti-American communist bastard.

And no, I didn't bother reading through the thread. Get real. If there's something I am supposed to have read, put it in the OP.

[Kade]

I prefer anti-American communist bastard.

And no, I didn't bother reading through the thread. Get real. If there's something I am supposed to have read, put it in the OP.


http://redwing.hutman.net/%7Emreed/Assets/troglodyte.jpg


Troglodyte seems to have emerged from the mists of time untouched by human evolution. Devoid of a single progressive idea and lacking the slightest awareness of social and cultural advances, Troglodyte has developed an incoherent political philosophy that he characterizes as "conservative" or "libertarian", but which could be more accurately described as "bigoted narcissism". His aggressive posturing often frightens off weaker, more timid Warriors. In pitched battle, however, Troglodyte easily loses control and his attack quickly degenerates into a rant. Just for the fun of it, Weenie, Issues. Pinko and Evil Clown will sometimes deliberately goad him into a towering rage.

[LittleLightShining]

I prefer anti-American communist bastard.

And no, I didn't bother reading through the thread. Get real. If there's something I am supposed to have read, put it in the OP.

Ummmm....
I've written a letter to endorse my friend for state senate here in Vermont. I'm fairly pleased with it except for one part, which is bolded below. I need a better word than "Liberals". I don't think it is an accurate description of the type of people I mean but I still want people to understand my point. I do not want to offend or alienate those folks who are true, classical Liberals.

[Conza88]

The concept of liberalism is intentionally corrupted by authoritative powers because there does not exist another concept or banner philosophy that people who are against authority can hold onto. They have successfully destroyed it in the minds of the serfdom. The Bushes, Cheney, Reagan, all the Neo-con elite.

Those that continue to allow the word to be used by themselves, instead of just pundits in this manner, are hurting their own movement. Especially if you believe in the philosophical foundation of liberalism, which most of you, unbeknown to yourselves, do.

Let me repeat this. If you believe that liberalism is what corrupted power says it is you are brainwashed.

Do you understand this, am I coming through to you? Liberalism is associated with negative words, like socialism, to erode YOUR freedoms. People also don't like the word "anarchy", because it too, has been corrupted.

This corruption however has failed. The intellectual elite of all countries, still adhere to the principles of liberalism, as it is generally understood, as a philosophy of individual freedom.

You are pawns. When you realize this, and defend it yourselves, you will see what you should be smart enough to see.

If you need more clarification, remember my words. Start by repeating the word to yourself, and reminding yourself where you heard it used...

Stop watching Fox News. Stop reading the totalitarian literature of the mid 1900s.

Liberalism is all we have left. When the last liberal is destroyed, you will not know. Instead, you will be uttering and thinking about the last eponymous line from 1984: "He loved Big Brother".

Jesus christ Kade.... I realise all this, what I get frustrated at.... is ALL you have to do is pre-face that.... you walk into a forum, and go "Hey guys, I'm a liberal" - knowing exactly what reaction it will get, because you know the word has become corrupted...

All I ask & actually truly support - as Mises said, people shouldn't give up on the word... I agree totally with fighting the esoteric agenda waged against it.

But you aren't doing anything towards that.... what you do is stir up shit, for no real reason.

All you've got to do is say; "I'm a liberal in the classical sense, the true meaning & sense of the word, which has become corrupted by the modern & social liberals" and a lot of people would be absolutely fine with that imo. I would be. You'd be doing a better service to yourself & others here.

You acknowledge the fact the reaction will get, but instead of taking the obvious steps to clarify or educate beforehand; you go right to the conclusion; witness the reactions and just go yep... "idiots, you're all idiots, collectivists etc"

You voluntarily associate yourself with "modern liberals" as a label, who from what I understand - hold practically none of the positions that you do. And, if in fact they do; it's because they have "socialism" within them... ergo Mises.

We're on the same mostly... all these labels tend to get in the way.

[Carole]

Socialists.

[StateofTrance]

Neocons.

+1 Both parties are big time Necons and Socialists.

[Sic Semper Tyrannis]

neoliberals?

[Kade]

Jesus christ Kade.... I realise all this, what I get frustrated at.... is ALL you have to do is pre-face that.... you walk into a forum, and go "Hey guys, I'm a liberal" - knowing exactly what reaction it will get, because you know the word has become corrupted...

All I ask & actually truly support - as Mises said, people shouldn't give up on the word... I agree totally with fighting the esoteric agenda waged against it.

But you aren't doing anything towards that.... what you do is stir up shit, for no real reason.

All you've got to do is say; "I'm a liberal in the classical sense, the true meaning & sense of the word, which has become corrupted by the modern & social liberals" and a lot of people would be absolutely fine with that imo. I would be. You'd be doing a better service to yourself & others here.

You acknowledge the fact the reaction will get, but instead of taking the obvious steps to clarify or educate beforehand; you go right to the conclusion; witness the reactions and just go yep... "idiots, you're all idiots, collectivists etc"

You voluntarily associate yourself with "modern liberals" as a label, who from what I understand - hold practically none of the positions that you do. And, if in fact they do; it's because they have "socialism" within them... ergo Mises.

We're on the same mostly... all these labels tend to get in the way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_liberalism_in_the_United_States ???

[Conza88]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_liberalism_in_the_United_States ???

Modern liberalism in the United States, also referred to as American liberalism, is a political ideology that seeks to use the power of the state to effect change upon society. Liberal issues include freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press, and also government provision of necessities seen as essential to freedom, such as education, health care, food, and shelter.

Modern American liberalism is a combination of social liberalism, social progressivism, and a mixed economy.. :eek:

???

[Kade]

Modern liberalism in the United States, also referred to as American liberalism, is a political ideology that seeks to use the power of the state to effect change upon society. Liberal issues include freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press, and also government provision of necessities seen as essential to freedom, such as education, health care, food, and shelter.

Modern American liberalism is a combination of social liberalism, social progressivism, and a mixed economy.. :eek:

???

Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and the creation of an egalitarian society.

I don't see the similarity.

[Conza88]

Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and the creation of an egalitarian society.

I don't see the similarity.

Per usual you don't give much, just tid bits... I mean really, a link and 3 question marks... lol.. :rolleyes: What am I meant to make of that? You agree completely with it all? Just parts? You really are a pain..

We'll go with mixed economy... :rolleyes:

"A mixed economy is an economic system that incorporates aspects of more than one economic system. This usually means an economy that contains both privately-owned and state-owned enterprises[1] or that combines elements of capitalism and socialism, or a mix of market economy and planned economy characteristics.[2]"

If you support a mixed economy, as the page article you linked to says 'modern liberals support...' You support part socialism, part state ownership of the means of production...

You may not Kade, I dunno - you don't divulge anything though... Not sure if it's out of fear.. or you just want to hold your cards to your heart so you can keep on calling others idiots and collectivists.. How about some help here aye.. :confused:

[Kade]

Per usual you don't give much, just tid bits... I mean really, a link and 3 question marks... lol.. :rolleyes: What am I meant to make of that? You agree completely with it all? Just parts? You really are a pain..

We'll go with mixed economy... :rolleyes:

"A mixed economy is an economic system that incorporates aspects of more than one economic system. This usually means an economy that contains both privately-owned and state-owned enterprises[1] or that combines elements of capitalism and socialism, or a mix of market economy and planned economy characteristics.[2]"

If you support a mixed economy, as the page article you linked to says 'modern liberals support...' You support part socialism, part state ownership of the means of production...

You may not Kade, I dunno - you don't divulge anything though... Not sure if it's out of fear.. or you just want to hold your cards to your heart so you can keep on calling others idiots and collectivists.. How about some help here aye.. :confused:


My cards have always been showing.

I believe in behavorial economics and reflexivity (Soros and Caginalp). I reject Praxeology.

I'm a technocrat. An anti-metaphysicalist, empiricist, Millian liberal. I like strong pluralistic and cultural diverse society. Belief in democratically initiated regulation of large corporate entities. Sympathetic to Chomskian classical anarchism. However, most of my ideas on government are rather unique.

I am open to a good rational debate about any subject, especially politics. Facts work. A basis for empathetic philosophical individualism, expanded meme spheres, and the defense of the Principia Cybernetica.

Individualist absolutist.

What more do you want to know?

[Conza88]

My cards have always been showing.

I believe in behavorial economics and reflexivity (Soros and Caginalp). I reject Praxeology.

I'm a technocrat. An anti-metaphysicalist, empiricist, Millian liberal. I like strong pluralistic and cultural diverse society. Belief in democratically initiated regulation of large corporate entities. Sympathetic to Chomskian classical anarchism. However, most of my ideas on government are rather unique.

I am open to a good rational debate about any subject, especially politics. Facts work. A basis for empathetic philosophical individualism, expanded meme spheres, and the defense of the Principia Cybernetica.

Individualist absolutist.

What more do you want to know?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAOxY_nHdew

.....

Hahah.... just kiddin'... :p