Democrats and Liberals

[Sidorio]

I seriously hope I got the names right.

So I was watching Scrubs, and the whole episode was about half of the staff being 'liberals' and half being 'democrats'. They spent the whole episode shouting at eachother about how much the hate the opposing side. I watched it all, and realised I didn't understand any of it.

Please, can somebody explain to me what the difference is and where it comes in to normal American life. I'm English, by the way, in case you hadn't realised. None of this stuff is ever mentioned over here. I think I worked out that one presidential candidate is always liberal, and the other is always democrat. And that they don't seem to argree much. (Just guesses, the latter's probably just an exaggeration. It was Scrubs that I'm basing this on).

Also, I don't care which one you are or your own personal opinions on this. I'm just curious, I don't want to start a huge flame war.

[elliott20]

umm... it's conservative vs. liberals, republicans vs. democrats.

basically, republicans tend to be conservatives and democrats tend to be liberals. however, they do not necessarily equate to one another as the con vs. lib thing describes a social attitude while the other describes party affiliation. The only time it's really relevant is that you can't vote for a liberal party, but you can vote for a democratic candidate with liberal ideals.

on the flip side of things, I've also met dems who seem conservative and republicans who seem liberal.

[TheMason]

The Economist earlier this month had a great article on the differences between English and American ideologies. Here is a pretty good graphical depiction of where both nation's political parties lay upon the ideological spectrum.

[Al6200]

Traditionally the word Liberal means being in favor of drastic sweeping change and the word conservative means being in favor of slow and gradual change. But in today's world those meanings are completely irrelevant. Liberals will call an idea that involves slow and gradual change "liberal" if they think it gives them a political advantage.

Basically, liberals have a certain block of people who support them, and conservatives have a block of people who support them. Since politicians can't alienate their base, they choose their positions on issues in order to support their own voting blocks.

Liberals:

-Disadvantaged, those who needs services from a large government
-People who believe that equality supercedes meritocracy
-Secular groups

Conservatives:

-People who want lower taxes
-People who believe in meritocracy
-Engineers, chemists, developers (in my engineering class, everyone who I've talked to is a Ron Paul style Republican)

More philosophically, I tend to think that a conservative position is one that benefits society as a whole, while a liberal idea is one that serves to benefit an individual. Conservatives support drug laws because they see that pot and cocaine make people unproductive.

[elliott20]

At 4/17/08 04:27 PM, Al6200 wrote: Traditionally the word Liberal means being in favor of drastic sweeping change and the word conservative means being in favor of slow and gradual change. But in today's world those meanings are completely irrelevant. Liberals will call an idea that involves slow and gradual change "liberal" if they think it gives them a political advantage.

Basically, liberals have a certain block of people who support them, and conservatives have a block of people who support them. Since politicians can't alienate their base, they choose their positions on issues in order to support their own voting blocks.

Liberals:

-Disadvantaged, those who needs services from a large government
-People who believe that equality supercedes meritocracy
-Secular groups

Conservatives:

-People who want lower taxes
-People who believe in meritocracy
-Engineers, chemists, developers (in my engineering class, everyone who I've talked to is a Ron Paul style Republican)

More philosophically, I tend to think that a conservative position is one that benefits society as a whole, while a liberal idea is one that serves to benefit an individual. Conservatives support drug laws because they see that pot and cocaine make people unproductive.

funny, most of the engineers, chemists and developers I know tend to be moderate liberals.

To be honest though, I think you're dealing far too much with absolutes there. I think even conservatives are going to want equality of some form, and I think even liberals will want to see people prove their credentials before being put in a position of great power. That kind of thing is just good sense, as opposed to being exclusive to a particular political leaning.

I do not believe that conservativism is necessarily good for a society. Conservativism has a greater tendency to create institutional biases, and is more subjected to internal institutional corruption when gone unchecked. To be fair though, extreme liberalism also has it's own hosts of issues. To me, every society is going to need both sides to maintain a balance or else we fall into the danger of becoming a totalitarian state.

[TheMason]

AI6200, there are also classical definitions of those terms as well...something modern ideological discourse is moving away from and going into a morass of perjorative and ambigiousness.

Classical Conservativism
This is a belief that the individual should not be trusted with government. This was the dominant political philosophy of fuedal Europe. This is an ideological philosophy no longer seen in democratic societies in the West.

Classical Liberalism
This is actually the dominant ideological paradigm of both major US political parties. This is the notion of government that arose out of the Enlightenment. That all men are created equal before the law and that they can be trusted with politics and business. Furthermore, this is the ideology that compliments capitalism. This is characterized by the idea that government should be hands off not interfere with social or business life.

Classical Socialism
This is really the dominant ideology of Europe's left. This ideology holds that the government should intervene to "level the playing field". It is really a combination of Classical Conservativism and Liberalism. The government is not all pervasive and it is representative democracy. However, the government needs to step in and right social wrongs and inequalities.

In the US these terms have been changed in modern times. Liberal has become a perjorative term and is often conflated with socialism (when in truth Obama and Clinton are to the Right of Europe's Left). On the other hand, Conservativism now means pre-FDR notions of Lassiez-Faire capitalism.

[fli]

Umm...
That episode was about Conservative views versus Liberal views...
In it, Elliot finally admits to being a Republican... Keith gets some for being a Republican,
and Kelso balances all by removing coffee privalges...

[Shaggytheclown17]

What is a liberal?

[MarioBegins]

I met a guy who considered himself a democrat but held 90% republican stances, he was part of the "old left" he was pro-union, but was against social activism like climate change awareness, anti-gay marriage, anti-illegal immigration, pro-gun etc.

[penis-plant]

Democrats, Liberals, Conservatives, Republicans.

dont get into it. anyone that gets mad at someone becuase they are on the "opposing side" never grew up after preschool.

[Sidorio]

At 4/17/08 04:55 PM, fli wrote: Umm...
That episode was about Conservative views versus Liberal views...
In it, Elliot finally admits to being a Republican... Keith gets some for being a Republican,
and Kelso balances all by removing coffee privalges...

Right, yeah....I really didn't get it.

[Al6200]

I once heard a really radical liberal say that in any situation, Republicans always defect while Democrats always cooperate. Not surprisingly, the guy didn't have a real math background and was naturally not getting the whole picture.

Basically he said that a Republican tries to invade other countries, they're using a strategy that increases their own fitness at the expense of others.

And at a first glance, that appears to make some inkling of sense. But in reality defining who is cooperating and who is defecting is very difficult. The only really good way to do it is to determine who is running the most irrational strategy and surviving, not who is running what we'd stereotypically think of as a "fight" strategy.

[Slizor]

Conservatives:

-People who want lower taxes
-People who believe in meritocracy

Urm, Conservatives tend to think that there is a meritocracy, rather than believe it is a principle that should be moved towards. Needless to say, a belief that meritocracy already exists leads them to some very strange positions.

At 4/17/08 04:51 PM, TheMason wrote: AI6200, there are also classical definitions of those terms as well...something modern ideological discourse is moving away from and going into a morass of perjorative and ambigiousness.

Classical Conservativism
This is a belief that the individual should not be trusted with government. This was the dominant political philosophy of fuedal Europe. This is an ideological philosophy no longer seen in democratic societies in the West.

Urm, what? "Classical" Conservatism could refer to any number of different ideas. You seem to be taking a Burkean view - that human nature is inherently bad and that without government life would be "nasty, brutish and short" and thus government is necessary - but while that may be seen as influential on Conservatism, Conservatism itself has defined itself as pragmatic and working on the basis of tradition (which represents the wisdom of our forebears and, as such, should not be trifled with lightly.)

Classical Socialism
This is really the dominant ideology of Europe's left. This ideology holds that the government should intervene to "level the playing field". It is really a combination of Classical Conservativism and Liberalism. The government is not all pervasive and it is representative democracy. However, the government needs to step in and right social wrongs and inequalities.

Urm.....no. "Classical" Socialism (again, a broad term) was revolutionary and represented a different strand of thought than both Conservatism and Liberalism. Socialism, in its "classical" form, could actually be said to have started with Marx and it was much later when it became less revolutionary than him.