[Meslocusist]

Basically because they usually won't even try to self-describe as 'nationalist', they'll instead dilute and call themselves 'patriots' (not the same thing, since anyone can wave a flag and act proud), and they'll never express a sincere interest in the issues that actually affect the people of the nation.

Fair enough.

To some extent, I'm beginning to reconsider if I'm actually a liberal (Or, as you have noted, a member of the left wing of liberalism, IE Social Democrat-Welfare liberal type person)- it seems that I just want reforms to the US system that in the rest of the industrialized world are more or less taken for granted.

[DanDaMan]

To some extent, I'm beginning to reconsider if I'm actually a liberal (Or, as you have noted, a member of the left wing of liberalism, IE Social Democrat-Welfare liberal type person)- it seems that I just want reforms to the US system that in the rest of the industrialized world are more or less taken for granted.

You are an American Liberal, from what you described.

I know, it's screwed up over here. But that's the Progressive Lefts fault. They had to rename themselves and of course they gave themselves a name to confuse. Hence they named themselves Liberals.

[Redlom Xof]

It's the name we all agreed on at our last big meeting.

[Meslocusist]

You are an American Liberal, from what you described.

I know, it's screwed up over here. But that's the Progressive Lefts fault. They had to rename themselves and of course they gave themselves a name to confuse. Hence they named themselves Liberals.

You are the absolute last person that I would trust to tell me what my position is.

I suppose my confusion comes from the fact that we have neither a Right nor a Left in America: just that we have the Right wing and Left wing of Liberalism. Therefore, I hadn't really seen Rightists, with whom I actually agree in many things, and had only seen neocons and the occasional libertarian, with whom I absolutely disagree.

On the other hand, I support wealth redistribution for ethical and not nationalistic reasons- though I support that this wealth redistribution happens in the course of national self sufficiency (approximate, not absolute) and investment in sustainable growth, lead primarily by the government. I see some merit in the Marxist historiography, but I don't think that the two classes are irreconcilable without violence, or that it is scientific enough to really explain how people work.

Someone tell me what they thing, I suppose. Someone who is not DanDaMan, if possible.

[DanDaMan]

I suppose my confusion comes from the fact that we have neither a Right nor a Left in America: just that we have the Right wing and Left wing of Liberalism. Therefore, I hadn't really seen Rightists, with whom I actually agree in many things, and had only seen neocons and the occasional libertarian, with whom I absolutely disagree.

I agree... you currently see a liberal government or Statism from the Republicans and Democrats.

On the other hand, I support wealth redistribution for ethical and not nationalistic reasons- though I support that this wealth redistribution happens in the course of national self sufficiency (approximate, not absolute) and investment in sustainable growth, lead primarily by the government. I see some merit in the Marxist historiography, but I don't think that the two classes are irreconcilable without violence, or that it is scientific enough to really explain how people work.

Someone tell me what they thing, I suppose. Someone who is not DanDaMan, if possible.

You're a Statist. Left of American Libertarians and Constitutionalists small government Republicans (me).

[Decky]

Why must we play this semantic game every time someone says "liberal" instead of just addressing the points the guy makes?

Why can't Americans just use the correct word? It's not a game, by the op makes no sense because he is using the word liberal to mean something else.

[DanDaMan]

Why can't Americans just use the correct word?

Two reasons.
A) the Progressive left renamed themselves Liberal because they had such a bad reputation.
B) They also started to run the schools and failed to teach who they really are.

[Figlio di Moros]

Rei, if we learn anything from Singapore, it's that single-payer healthcare isn't the only, or even main, cause for low healthcare costs per GDP. There's a distinct advantage in economy of scale, but the key advantage is actually regulating cost to prevent high costs. By actively preventing the cost of healthcare to rise, the government of Singapore maintains an otherwise free-market system with one of the most affordable and best quality healthcare systems.

Also, many of the statistics on the standard of living in America are slanted. To use your example, a poor man in France and America would largely recieve the same income and benefits, but at a lower tax rate and cost of living in America. The reason the French recieve a better rating is that America doesn't include government benefits as a part of the standard of living, and "universal" systems often automatically create higher ratings on various SoL measurements in several categories, whereas the same benefits given based on accord of affordibility rather than universality(Medicare/-caid v. NHS) aren't accredited any favor.

[Negotiator]

Its easy.

To be respected, you have to be white, male, conservative, etc.

While words for black, female, progressive, etc turn into insults in the course of centuries or sometimes just decades.

For example, blacks have been called "negro" or "colored" in the past. These words are now politically incorrect.

And I dont think the amerian liberals actually renamed themselves. More often than not, people are named by their opponents.