3 ms·

If only "liberal" meant anything that specific, in practice. "Conservative" and "liberal" are both ridiculously bent terms in the US, reduced to meaning nothin

If only "liberal" meant anything that specific, in practice. "Conservative" and "liberal" are both ridiculously bent terms in the US, reduced to meaning nothing more than "What Republicans want" and "What Democrats want". In practice, these aren't really all that different sets of demands - it's simply the propaganda of the Democrats to construe Republicans as militaristic psuedo-libertarians and the propaganda of the Republicans to construe Democrats as pacifistic psuedo-socialists.

eru 16y ago
Yes. Although Social Democracy isn't a very specific terms in countries where it's in active use, either.
tptacek 16y ago
For what it's worth, I want what Democrats want: a strong public school system with centralized governance, national single-payer health care, legal protection for labor unions (I'm a fan of the 8-hour work day), a progressive tax system to pay for it, and the maximum possible business-friendliness obtainable given those constraints.
- Semiapies 16y ago
  And if you thought the majority of Republicans didn't want the same thing on all those points, within some wiggle-room on definitions and chauvinism over which party's policies to do roughly the same thing are better...well, you'd be surprised talking to them, then. Likewise, you and most other Democrats would probably go, "Hell, we want that, too!" if a Republican listed off eir concerns about national security, countering terrorism, balancing the budget, reducing waste, etc. And when the rubber hits the road, even fewer differences come up. The Republicans never carried out their boast of dismantling the Department of Education back in the 90s; by 2000, Bush ran on the promise of further centralizing education and enlarging the DoE, both of which he did. Republicans acted as if Obama was going to cut and run in Iraq and Afghanistan, if it didn't turn out to be possible to simply surrender to Al Queda; this has, to say the very least, not happened.
  - tptacek 16y ago
    I'd be surprised to hear that Patrick McKenzie believes in a strong public school system with centralized control, protection for labor unions, or single-payer health care.
    - Semiapies 16y ago
      I'd be very surprised if the Republican party and its voting base were made up of Patrick McKenzie - or even people who agreed with him on every issue. The blunt fact is that both parties are, in American terms, very, very centrist. If the supporters of either party significantly resembled the outliers that supporters of the other party use as stereotypes, American politics would be wildly different from what it actually is.
      - tptacek 16y ago
        The self-identified Republicans I am acquainted with are not looking to meet in the middle on these three issues. They believe in private schools, a free market for labor with no protection for unions, and a system of private and deregulated health insurance. I don't think these are inherently bad ideas, either; I just don't agree with them. (For what it's worth, I believe in a strong social safety net, and I don't believe we should plow money from the federal budget into the stock market, but I could go either way on the specifics of Social Security).
        Semiapies 16y ago
        Think about that for a second: if roughly half of this country actually felt the same way on all those issues, how could Bush have run on spending more on public schools and placing them under greater federal control, how would we have the many thousands of labor-protection laws we have, and why would we still have things like Medicare and Medicaid, just to start with? They don't. Your acquaintances are rather staunch outliers to hold those positions.
        16y ago

eru 16y ago

Yes. Although Social Democracy isn't a very specific terms in countries where it's in active use, either.

tptacek 16y ago

For what it's worth, I want what Democrats want: a strong public school system with centralized governance, national single-payer health care, legal protection for labor unions (I'm a fan of the 8-hour work day), a progressive tax system to pay for it, and the maximum possible business-friendliness obtainable given those constraints.

Semiapies 16y ago
And if you thought the majority of Republicans didn't want the same thing on all those points, within some wiggle-room on definitions and chauvinism over which party's policies to do roughly the same thing are better...well, you'd be surprised talking to them, then. Likewise, you and most other Democrats would probably go, "Hell, we want that, too!" if a Republican listed off eir concerns about national security, countering terrorism, balancing the budget, reducing waste, etc. And when the rubber hits the road, even fewer differences come up. The Republicans never carried out their boast of dismantling the Department of Education back in the 90s; by 2000, Bush ran on the promise of further centralizing education and enlarging the DoE, both of which he did. Republicans acted as if Obama was going to cut and run in Iraq and Afghanistan, if it didn't turn out to be possible to simply surrender to Al Queda; this has, to say the very least, not happened.
- tptacek 16y ago
  I'd be surprised to hear that Patrick McKenzie believes in a strong public school system with centralized control, protection for labor unions, or single-payer health care.
  - Semiapies 16y ago
    I'd be very surprised if the Republican party and its voting base were made up of Patrick McKenzie - or even people who agreed with him on every issue. The blunt fact is that both parties are, in American terms, very, very centrist. If the supporters of either party significantly resembled the outliers that supporters of the other party use as stereotypes, American politics would be wildly different from what it actually is.
    - tptacek 16y ago
      The self-identified Republicans I am acquainted with are not looking to meet in the middle on these three issues. They believe in private schools, a free market for labor with no protection for unions, and a system of private and deregulated health insurance. I don't think these are inherently bad ideas, either; I just don't agree with them. (For what it's worth, I believe in a strong social safety net, and I don't believe we should plow money from the federal budget into the stock market, but I could go either way on the specifics of Social Security).
      - Semiapies 16y ago
        Think about that for a second: if roughly half of this country actually felt the same way on all those issues, how could Bush have run on spending more on public schools and placing them under greater federal control, how would we have the many thousands of labor-protection laws we have, and why would we still have things like Medicare and Medicaid, just to start with? They don't. Your acquaintances are rather staunch outliers to hold those positions.
        16y ago