[Dagoth Ur]

Conservative liberals like you deny being liberal. What is wrong with the OP?

[so_crates]

So what your telling me now is that you not reading the thread.

Another progressive strategy: having you explain the same thing over and over again, hoping you'll get frustrated. Re-read the thread, if you have any specific question (as in were logic is flawed or definition of a word) I'll be glad to answer them.

Also, trying to put the onus on me (by saying you don't understand elementary logic), doesn't take it off you.(to find the flaw in my reasoning)

[Pants-of-dog]

so-crates, please define "liberal", thank you.

[Dagoth Ur]

Op literally says: "why american conservatives deny that they are idelogical liberals?"
Socks: "why are you conflating different things?"
Everybody else: "kek"

[so_crates]

Op literally says: "why american conservatives deny that they are idelogical liberals?"
Socks: "why are you conflating different things?"
Everybody else: "kek"

Everybody else? Like Obama's "Everybody agrees with me." Which means "I'm so egotistical I think everybody agrees with me and if they don't I'll ignore it.

So where is "everybody else" and why aren't they showing me the flaw in my reasoning?

Laughing at reasoning shows the moral bankrupcy of the cause. If you don't run a country on logic you run it on whim. Not a good thing for governance.

[Pants-of-dog]

so-crates, there is no error in logic to say that conservatives are a subset of liberals, if you are using the term "liberal" in the same way that political scientists do.

[Zamuel]

So where is "everybody else" and why aren't they showing me the flaw in my reasoning?

Your REASONING is acceptable. It's your CONCLUSION that is not ... the FLAW revolves around a little concept called CONTEXT.

It's also the answer to the OP title which specifies AMERICAN conservatives, but then goes on to apply an archaic context to link the two philosophies. In an AMERICAN context, they represent two differential ideas. In the archaic context, it's quite true that American Conservatives are descended from "Liberal" values.

SO ... the REASON they don't label themselves as "Liberals" is that this is 21st century America and NOT 18th Century France.

OK ?

Zam

[mikema63]

The definition of ideological liberalism is not relegated to 18th century franc, it's quite current and applicable.

[Hong Wu]

I'm more of a rad trad and can't really debate with people. They generally have no idea where I'm coming from and get really upset and confused if I win an argument.

[mikema63]

I'm more of a rad trad and can't really debate with people. They generally have no idea where I'm coming from and get really upset and confused if I win an argument.

Nobody wins an argument, an argument isn't a formal debate that you can get points in and be declared the victor. At best you can only convince someone your correct, which is astonishingly rare.

[Hong Wu]

Well yes, that's true. But sometimes people are very determined to argue with you. And if you humor them and successfully deconstruct their point of view, they generally don't appreciate it.

[Zamuel]

The definition of ideological liberalism is not relegated to 18th century franc, it's quite current and applicable.

True, but it's still archaic and NOT a contemporary American context. Most Americans don't have a CLUE about the French revolution, beyond the guillotine and "let them eat cake."

Zam

[Dagoth Ur]

Most Americans do have a cursory knowledge of the bill of rights and basic liberal tenets. That they don't understand they are fully liberal is more a testament to the fact that political education in America is basically nonexistent, than the laughable idea that liberalism doesn't have a contemporary modern American context.

[Hong Wu]

Traditional conservatism has no history in north America, so the furthest back you can go while still identifying as being thoroughly American is classic liberalism. As Dag said, there's no real political education in the US so people don't even realize that this is liberalism. There's also no moral education since church and state are recently separated and western morals have always been taught through church. East Asians are more resistant to liberalism because their morals were taught through Confucianism which isn't a church per se.

[quetzalcoatl]

It further shows a flaw in reasoning.

It take a couple of characteristics both share and then tries to conflate both.

A dog has fur, a tail, and four legs

A cat has fur, a tail, and four legs

So we should call cats dogs

This is illogical, even though both are in a metaset called mammals and another called animals


Lutherans worship in churches, sing hymns, and believe in Jesus Christ

Catholics worship in churches, sing hymns, and believe in Jesus Christ

So Lutherans are Catholics.

This is illogical even though both belong in a metaset called religion.


A Chevy has a motor, brakes, and four tires

A Ford has a motor, brakes, and four tires

So a Chevy is a Ford.

This is illogical even though both belong in a metaset called automobiles, then another called machines.


A man has two eyes, two hands, and a heart.

A woman has two eyes, two hands, and a heart.

So we should call women men.

This is illogical even though both belong to metaset called humans, then primates, then mammals, then animals

See the flaw?

Cats and dogs are both mammals. US-style conservatism and liberalism are both subsets of classical liberalism. This is acknowledged by most thoughtful conservatives, who trace their lineage from Edmund Burke.

Nineteenth century conservatives despised capitalism (more particularly the industrial revolution) because it liquidates everything, including traditional social norms. The current US conservative movement's adherence to free markets and free trade puts it squarely in the classical liberal tradition. An exception might be paleo-conservatives like Pat Buchanan who oppose free trade.

When you hear a conservative say "government should get out of the way and let the free market operate" they are self-identifying as part of the radical wing of liberalism.

[so_crates]

If what you say is true, Democrats should be calling themselves Jefferson Republicans. After all the modern democratic party is a subset of Jeffersonian Republicans.

http://www.britannica.com/topic/Democra ... ican-Party

Here's a PBS article saying essentially the same thing:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/duel/peopl ... nde09.html

Now since you want conservatives to call themselves liberals, then by your logic liberals, or Democrats, should be calling themselves Jeffersonian Republicans.

[Zamuel]

Most Americans do have a cursory knowledge of the bill of rights and basic liberal tenets. - a testament to the fact that political education in America is basically nonexistent - the laughable idea that liberalism doesn't have a contemporary modern American context.

Your acknowledgement that Americans are aware of THEIR political heritage is contrary to your assertion that "political education" in America doesn't exist. EVERY American learns the basics that apply to contemporary American culture. It's not necessary to know more to participate in the American dynamic. VERY thorough training is available to those who desire it. American Universities educate MORE foreign students than the rest of the world combined.

No one said there wasn't a contemporary liberal context in America. What was explained was that it -IS- contemporary and not classical. It concerns itself with MODERN issues like racism, gender equality, and the distribution of wealth ... the archaic issues, the "fraternity" of man and sovereignty of the individual, are assumed as givens.

Zam

[Jeliza-Rose]

What amuses me is when a "Republican" pipes up and says..."We aren't a Democracy...we're a REPUBLIC!!!"

And then it's explained to them that if they are pro-republic, then technically they are a leftwing liberal...and that they are no different then Robespierre and those godless Jacobins, who said things like - "Mankind will never be free until the last King is strangled with the entrails of the last Priest" - Denis Diderot

[so_crates]

Apparently you didn't read my post.

They're not a left wing liberal, they are a Jeffersonian Republican as that's where the Democrats were formed.

[Jeliza-Rose]

Apparently you didn't read my post.

...Jeffersonian Republican as that's where the Democrats were formed.

Jeffersonian Republican - aka - Democratic-Republican

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrati ... ican_Party

The point is - we're all leftwing - the only true rightwingers are Monarchists.