Under these definitions, don’t you agree “Liberal” is the right way the Founding Fathers would want America?
Liberalism is a broad class of political philosophies that considers individual liberty and equality to be the most important political goals.Liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity,freedom of thought and speech, limitations on the power of governments, the rule of law, an individual’s right to private property,and a transparent system of government.Liberalism has its roots in the Age of Enlightenment(etc.Founding Fathers, American Declaration of Independence, the United States Bill of Rights)in which reason was advocated as the primary source and legitimacy for authority and rejects many foundational assumptions that dominated most earlier theories of government, established religion.
Conservatism is a political and social term from the Latin verb conservare meaning to save or preserve. As the name suggests it usually indicates support for tradition and traditional values ,fiscal conservatism, supply-side economics, social conservatism, libertarian conservatism, bioconservatism and religious conservatism,as well as support for a strong military.US President Abraham Lincoln wrote, that conservatism is “the adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried.”social conservatives emphasize traditional views of social units such as the family, church, or locale,many religious conservatives believe that government should have a role in defending moral values,lower taxes and government spending.Some of what conservatives and libertarians consider victimless crimes such as sodomy have been decriminalized in the United States.Some states and local governments have relaxed laws on marijuana use and medical marijuana, though conservatives and some libertarians argue that the War on Drugs still constitutes one of the greatest threats to liberty in the United States as a whole.
WIKIPEDIA..I COPIED AND PASTED..I DID NOT AUTHOR THE DEFINITIONS…FYI
Liberal may refer to:
Politics
Liberalism
Classical liberalism
Social liberalism
Liberalism has its roots in the Age of Enlightenment…..WHO WAS APART OF THE AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT….founding fathers
THE FOUNDING FATHERS, IF THEY SAW THE RESULT OF UNREGULATED GUN CONTROL, WOULD HAVE TO ADRESS THE PROBLEM IN THIS HERE MODERN SOCIETY, I COME FROM NY ARE U SERIOUS?PEOPLE RUNNING AROUND WITH UNRESTRICTED LAWS WITH GUNS.?, EVERY SIX MONTHS RENEWEL OF LICENSES, AND TIGHTER REQUIRMENTS FOR APPROVAL…..THE FOUNDING FATHERS WERE SMART ENOUGH TO KNOW THE CONSTITUTION WOULD HAVE TO BE AMENDED WITH THE TIMES…AND THOSE TIMES WOULD BE WITH A POPULATION OF 300MILLION PLUS WITH NO REGULATIONS OF ARMS..I SUPPORT THE SECOND AMENDMENT..WITH RESTRICTIONS..AND THEY WOULD TOO IN THESE TIMES….
THEY BELIEVED IN EQUAL RIGHTS…THAT WOULD INCLUDE MINORITES, WOMEN, AND HOMOSEXUALS.LIKE IT OR NOT..
DON’T YOU THINK BOTH PARTIES NEED TO STOP BEING DEMONIZED, THEY BOTH OFFER VALID IDEAOLOGIES, AND CAN COMPROMISE TO BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE?I DO.
I DIDN’T TWIST ANYTHING, COPY AND PASTE WOULDN’T ALLOW ME, OTHERWISE I WOULD HAVE WRITTEN MY OPINION COMPLETELY WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN HARSH..I AGREE TO AN EXTENT THEY BOTH ARE NOT LIVING UP TO THEIR TRUE DEFINITIONS, HOWEVER THE LATTER IS MORE SO.
I REALLY JUST AM ASKING..I AM NOT TELLING AS MUCH AS IT MAY SEEM..I REALLY DO WANT PEOPLE’S OPINIONS…
Republicans would have been viewed as Tories, and probably tarred and feathered.
Probably but you definition of Liberal is nowhere near what a liberal is today. They oppose free speech or thought and feel the government is more important than the individual..
So why don’t liberals adhere to this Wikipedia definition?
Or…
Maybe Wikipedia in not as unbiased and authoritative as we would like it to be.
those arent the right definitions
What you found was the definition of classical liberalism, which is more what libertarianism is today. “Liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity,freedom of thought and speech, limitations on the power of governments, the rule of law, an individual’s right to private property,and a transparent system of government” certainly does NOT apply to those who call themselves “liberals” today.
Today’s “liberals” are really authoritarians, especially as they see no limits on the power of governments. The Founding Fathers would cringe thinking that the government they started is in many ways more oppressive than the one they revolted from under George III.
How many times are you going to “ask” the same cut and paste “question”?
Eighteenth Century liberals would find their Twenty-First Century namesakes as alien as Klingons.
Typical neo-con (Brian)…No, we do not want to elminiate any of the freedoms you mention, that’s just rhetorical GOP BS. But yes, this definition of a “Liberal” is what most liberals would agree with…
your definition of liberal is so different from what liberal is today. the founding father would NOT want what the liberals would want.
Sorry, but your definition is the definition of a classic liberal. Current liberals would have been labelled progressives 80 years ago.
There’s a reason the term “classical liberalism” was created.
It’s to distinguish the liberalism of the founding fathers (maximum individual liberty and economic freedom and rights, based on morality, with limited government) and the current “liberalism” of today’s left (big government control, taking away liberties and rights “for your own good” or “for the children” or “for the environment”, but allowing all the licentiousness and deviancy you care to indulge in).
Today’s “liberalism” has almost nothing in common with the liberalism the Founding Fathers believed in and what the Constitution was founded upon.
if those were accurate definitions, we would be okay with either one, but they are not and we are not.
how do you reconcile your apparent belief in individual rights and less government power with expanding the governments power to limit individuals rights as with gun ownership?
the idea that rights should be limited as the population grows is not represented in either of these definitions. what other rights do you suppose should be limited now that we have 300 million people; speech, assembly, liberty, life?
I don’t understand what you’re trying to do here. Classical liberalism, i.e. free market ideals, emphasis on the individual, etc. and so forth, are what the conservatives and libertarians are standing behind. Classical liberalism is what conservatives are “conserving,” per se.
What we know to be “liberal” today is most definitely not classical liberalism. It’s more appropriately termed progressivism, and began around the turn of the century with the Progressive Era and presidents such as Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.
I’d say yes, but the term liberalism as you have defined it also encompasses modern conservatism and libertarianism. Liberalism and conservatism in the US have become something very different, with both in many cases straying from the tenets of classic liberalism. As for your rant about gun control, I believe that there should be sensible restrictions to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. The problem is that these restrictions already exist. In many cases we need to simply enforce the laws already on the books rather than making it more difficult for a law abiding citizen to get a firearm, and then overwhelming him or her with red tape once they do. It won’t accomplish anything. Criminals and over the edge people like the VT shooter will still get weapons through whatever means necessary.
Van Morrison – You are only half correct. Yes, todays liberals are more descendents of the progressives of old. However, the part about communism is complete BS. Teddy Roosevelt helped found communism, along with Robert Lafollette, Woodrow Wilson, etc.? You need to get yourself to a library.
First off you use wikipedia as a reliable source, even our founding fathers would not have done so. You do also realize that criminals will not follow the laws in obtaining guns. which means several guns on the streets are not covered by the law. There are several regulations on firearm ownership, but when people do not follow those regulations, you have thousand who obtained them illegally. So frankly your rant does not hold water. Our founding fathers, were for protecting the freedoms of the land, not for making any person “equal” to others other than the freedom to have the opportunity to gain a form of equality through hard work and education. When a nation gives hand outs, they take away a person’s freedom and desire to do better, this is what our nation was founded upon, the individuals willingness to make improvements to obtain life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not to be controlled by any force including the government. There is no reason or bases that tighter regulation should be imposed on law abiding citizens, but rather the enforcement of current regulation toward those who do not abide by current laws. Liberalism, as define would still seek to impose restraints on law abiding citizens in order to attempt to create an equality that would remove freedoms from the majority.
In your Liberal definition you state the individuals right to freedom & personal property. That is untrue of today’s Liberals. Property includes income, modern libs want to take an individuals income & redistribute it to others. That is unconstitutional.
It all started with FDR’s new deal and hasn’t worked. I agree we, as Americans, should help the needy, but the system has been abused. We are giving hand outs to lazy people who milk the system, and Illegal Aliens who don’t deserve it. The only reason these individuals are granted hand outs is to but their votes, that is why a great majority of them vote Dem & the Dem’s want to keep them dependent on the government
I would like to chime in here. I do think liberalism is the right way to go by your definition, however, in America, liberalism is a completely different thing. the liberalism you have listed up there is more along the lines of classical liberalism, which today, would be libertarianism.