PostModernism.. Liberalism.. wtf?

[BlackfootFerret]

Hello, just stopping by to drop in my 2 cents.

First off, I've never really followed the Abstract Art scene, so I'm no expert on whatever Earlier Modern thought is supposed to be. I do have a fairly good education overall though, so calling it "a towering philosophical edifice that seems to dominate Western Civilization's cultural landscape" sounds a bit overdone. I have a decent grip on what Liberalism is though, so here's a quick question:

If you were a Christian Conservative at the time of the American Revolution, which side would you support?

Think about this a moment, then read on.

Broken down to the most basic level, Liberalism is the belief that the world can be improved by making changes, and this should be a high priority, while Conservatism is the belief that the world is fine the way it is, and any and all change is dangerous, particularly when it comes down to religion. The truth is absolute and unchanging.

Well, as everyone knows, Heaven has a King. So it would stand to reason that if it's good enough for the angels it should be more than good enough for humans, yes? And indeed, the humans in England had a King, one of many in the timeless tradition of God's representaive ruling on Earth, who would always say "We" instead of "I" out of respect of this sacred relationship. This was the way of the world since time imaginable, and was as it should be ever after.

Then, one day, something terrible happened. A group of colonists, far out of touch with the motherland across the sea, lost their way. Lead by some almost comical pseudo-intellectual ideals that mere humans could actually surpass the wisdom of God by governing -themselves- without George III's divine inspiration, going so far as to commit acts of terrorism against the good King's fleet, siezing tea and spilling it into the harbor amid jeering laughs. When soldiers arrived to restore order and security, these Radicals descended completely into madness by murdering them and declaring war upon England, George, and therefore God himself.

At the head of this movement was as motley and unGodly an assortment of individuals as ever one might see. Thomas, the Firebrand, openly spoke out against the Church and the power it justly wielded over all governments of the world. Another George commiteed his time to killing the True George's subjects, and spreading the corruption by convincing other colonists who had yet to forsake their King that they would be better without him. And most symbolic and laughable was The Fat Man, one of the damned circle of Scientists who did not fear lightning bolts from above, speaking in terms of numbers and philosphy when he wasn't out chasing women. And yet by the great perversion of reason out of which this Revolution was wrought, even the monster Franklin was held up as a wise man.

They believed in change, somehow daring to question the timeness nature of the world, saying there was a better way to shape the world. They were Liberals to the very last man, and they called this heathen state America...

(SomeDoomMusic.mp3)

Ok, I'll cut off the Olde English theatric spin now, but picture yourself as a devout Christian living in England at the time news of the Revolution arrived. What would you think of it? Where would you think it was going, if you didn't know what America and the idea of Democracy would accomplish over the next two centuries? It would seem like the end of the world.

Liberalism isn't just about ensuring people have the right to speak their minds without censorship, the right of minorities to vote, or even about the right of women to vote. Without Liberalism, *NOBODY WOULD BE VOTING AT ALL*. England, its Colonies, Europe, and the rest of the World would just grind away through time with the same cycle of petty little wars, but no change to the system itself to speak of, much like ancient China.

So, summing all of this up, there's a bit more to being Liberal than Bad Art. Although if you never try something stupid and new from time to time you'll never know what you might have found.

[Deckard Canine]

I think RHJ was using the term in a sense that's more common these days. Like "conservatism," it is not exactly fixed, even in a given period.

Not to take a po-mo view of language, here.

[Sciguy]

If you ask me, I see Liberalism and Conservatism in two diffrent ways.

Liberals these days look for the short term answer.

Conservatives seek the Long term.

Short term, while quick, doesn't yeild substasual results and has bad reprcusions *gough* Clinton Era.

Concervatives like Bush, have long term goals they can't finish out in office because their goals are set far off and they hope the next guy has the sense to see the course.

As for Postmoderism, there are sociatal limits that many beleafs cross, like Natziism and the KKK. Can we actualy use a bit of common sense. They never where religons to begin with. And while they do take the form of poloicial stances, they should be watched for their terroristic potential.

[LoneWolf23k]

There's also the fact that Conservatives stick to traditional, tried-and-true beliefs that have served their ancestors well, while Liberals are far more willing to experiment with various beliefs, which they consider "progressive".

...Not that being too hide-bound in old traditions is always a good thing: many Muslims in arab nations still practice violent traditions that most modern people would consider abhorrent, and they also reject "progress" to quite an extent...

[Lazerus]

If you ask me, I see Liberalism and Conservatism in two diffrent ways.

Liberals these days look for the short term answer.

Conservatives seek the Long term.

Short term, while quick, doesn't yeild substasual results and has bad reprcusions *gough* Clinton Era.

Concervatives like Bush, have long term goals they can't finish out in office because their goals are set far off and they hope the next guy has the sense to see the course.

As for Postmoderism, there are sociatal limits that many beleafs cross, like Natziism and the KKK. Can we actualy use a bit of common sense. They never where religons to begin with. And while they do take the form of poloicial stances, they should be watched for their terroristic potential.

Yes, because defunding R&D, banning some forms of research alltogether, destroying our reputation abroad, and getting our troops into Vietraq serves our long term intrests well.

I used to respect the republican party (small government, civil rights, low taxes), but the Religous-Right/Neocons have really dropped the ball on this one.

[Sciguy]

It's not like Veitnam over there. Our boys are actualy trained and on top. The problem is the terrorist have an easyer time getting into their country because that border is easyer to get over then the Canadian one.

[Capnregex]

The problem with both Conservative and Liberal politics is they are both being run by the Socialists.
The discussion should be not be
Liberal vs Conservative
but rather
Socialism vs Capitalism
Mysticism vs Objectivism

Careful RH, your starting to sound like Ayn Rand

[Lazerus]

It's not like Veitnam over there. Our boys are actualy trained and on top. The problem is the terrorist have an easyer time getting into their country because that border is easyer to get over then the Canadian one.

That dosn't matter.

If we can kill, say, 25 insurgents for every 1 of our soliders, and there are 30 young muslem men wiling to die for their god per solider, we still loose.

[RHJunior]

If there are 25 muslims willing to kill and die for Allah, and noone on our side willing to fight them... THEN is when we lose.

[StrangeWulf13]

Who let the trolls in?!

Solidus!! Fence maintenence was supposed to be your job, not mine! Get yer lazy ringtailed butt in gear! Pronto!


Ah well... I'll just get the grill started for the ones that made it inside...

[Deckard Canine]

Liberals these days look for the short term answer.

Conservatives seek the Long term.

Too simplistic. Environmentalism is extremely long term.

[ChronicMisadventures]

Solidus!! Fence maintenence was supposed to be your job, not mine! Get yer lazy ringtailed butt in gear! Pronto!

Solidus was maintaining the fence. That's why section 2A suffered spontaneous existence failure and imploded, while sectors 3-4 are now glowing after the fence in that area suffered a meltdown, despite the lack of any nuclear materials in its construction.

[Atarlost]

Liberal vs conservative is utter nonsense. The opposite of Liberal is totalitarian, not conservative and the opposite of conservative is progressive not liberal. Most conservatives are extremely liberal, often more liberal than progressives. The confusion comes from the fact that the progressives have hijacked the term liberal. Almost without exception they aren't liberal at all. If they were they would be leading the support of the Iraq war. The progressives are gong to pull out before the job is done because they don't think the freedom of brown people is worth the lives of white people. They are going to cut and run and destroy our ability to effectively conduct diplomacy for at least a generation because looking outwards distracts hte nation from the important issues like making sure Adam can marry Steve even though Steve is in fact eight years old and Adam is a 30 year old NAMBLA member, and making sure Miguel from Mexico who entered the country illegally and doesn't even have a passport can get free health care. We can't let freeing women who are for all intents and purposes slaves to their so called husbands interfere with pandering to the black vote by dangling the promis of slavery reparations, can we?

[RHJunior]

For liberalism and totalitarianism to be opposites, liberalism would have to lead to different results.

[Calbeck]

If we can kill, say, 25 insurgents for every 1 of our soliders, and there are 30 young muslem men wiling to die for their god per solider, we still loose.

All indications are there aren't that many young Muslim men willing to die for Allah (or at least not Allah as presented by the insurgents).

For one, it's an established fact that MONEY, not FAITH, drives most of the insurgents to the battlefield. It's a paying gig in a nation rife with unemployment, and the way they fight an individual soldier can go a long time without ever having to expose himself to Coalition fire.

For another, the hardcore nuts driving the insurgency are themselves doing it for PAYBACK, not FAITH. They are the Sunnis who lost family members when the Sunni-dominated Army was shot up, whose preferential treatment under Hussein placed them close to their jobs in the government and military offices we bombed. The Sunnis had all the power in Iraq before the invasion, and now they are being forced to treat Shias and Kurds as equals.

It's the equivalent of taking 1920 America and forcing the whites to accept the blacks and Native Americans as being equal. You can bet there'd have been an insurgency over THAT, too (especially since the KKK was at its height of popularity then).

What we're fighting is the Iraqi KKK, for all intents and purposes.

[BrockthePaine]

A few months ago, we intercepted a letter between the leader of AlQuada in Iraq and Osama: it said basically "We've only got fifty people left in the entire country, send us help!"

[Atarlost]

For liberalism and totalitarianism to be opposites, liberalism would have to lead to different results.

I think it does. I'm using an older defenition of liberal. A liberal is someone who desires liberty for his neighbor. The more people he includes in his defenition of neighbor the more liberal he is. A totalitarian only wants liberty for himself. I used the term progressive for modern so called liberals. I thought I made my distinction clear.

[Deckard Canine]

D.C. Simpson once asked why American officials can be as far right as anything but never more than slightly left of center. Someone replied that the extreme left included figures like Stalin.

I prefer the graph that puts liberal and conservative on the x-axis and authoritarian and libertarian on the y-axis. Detail is good.

[Sapphire]

I prefer the graph that puts liberal and conservative on the x-axis and authoritarian and libertarian on the y-axis. Detail is good.

You mean this one?

[Deckard Canine]

That's it, all right. The conservatives here should be pleased to note that the right side has the positive x-axis coordinates.