Why do liberals like free government handouts?
The trouble with liberals is just that they know so much that isn't so. The Liberal ideology is a theory , fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and which holds forth beliefs that have no basis in reality. They are Advocates of a policy that empowers a strong federal government to enslave its people with a high tax burden incident to the support of extravagant and unnecessary social programs destructive to both the work ethic among the lower class, and the incentive to innovate and succeed among the working class. Arnie
Why is the term "liberal" a political bad word in the United States and a beacon of hope in most of the rest of the world?
The modern political spectrum in the West consists of the far right, the right, liberalism, the left, and the radical left. Obviously, liberalism represents the center or the middle ground of the spectrum. The fact that the term “liberal” is a bad or derogatory word in the US can only mean that America is a relatively conservative society.In what sense America is a conservative society? Both culturally and politically. In the cultural sphere, America is the most religious country in the Western world in terms of the portion of Christians in its population. Thus, there is strong support for Christian evangelism and fundamentalism in American society. The existence of the New Right politics or neoconservatism since the 1980s in the US is a clear indication of the conservative nature of American society. In the political sphere, America is also the most conservative country in the Western world. Despite its democratic pretensions, America’s politics is essentially plutocratic and oligarchic. Power is mainly at the service of big corporations or the rich. As a result, the gap between the rich and poor in the US is the largest among developed countries.Liberalism itself is a complicated concept, which involves economic, political, and cultural dimensions. Economic liberalism only cares about freedom in the economic sphere, or the free market (the invisible hand). Economic liberalism is incompatible with state-owned enterprises and the welfare state in general, but it can comfortably coexist with political conservativism. Therefore, it is no surprise that neoliberalism has converged with neoconservatism in the West, especially the Anglo-Saxon world (hence Reagan-Thatcherism). However, both political liberalism and cultural liberalism are significantly different from economic liberalism. Political liberalism tends to emphasize political equality, which can be more or less translated into social equality, including economic equality. In other words, there is much room for socialism in political liberalism. On the other hand, cultural liberalism is an antithesis of cultural conservatism. The “Sexual Revolution” in the 1960s, which fundamentally shook the Christian family values in the US/West, and cultural Marxism, which has been prevalent on campuses (the New Left), can be seen as examples of cultural liberalism.Apparently, what many Americans dislike is not economic liberalism, but political liberalism and cultural liberalism.
Why do liberal progressives hate Capitalism?
I didn't bother reading your most likely rambling paragraph answering a question no one asked you, let me guess Mexico, immigration, poor people handouts yada-yada-yada. However, I will answer the question you asked us. Liberals hate capitalism because it doesn't work. Often in intellectual fields leaders write papers then other leaders come behind and criticize it, write a paper on their own and the field PROGRESSES ("progressives" get it?). Adam Smith wrote a overly simplistic view of how pure capitalism serves all but very quickly he was rebuked proven wrong and the world moved on--until American "capitalist" aka rich corporations existing in a vacuum with little or no government in control took over the economy, the government the media etc. and convinced you little peon that you that the shirt on your back was all your doing and no one else-- not the collective that built the roads in front of your house not the collective that pumped water to your house to wash that shirt just you. Resulting so that you support their domination and suppression of you. And when you work harder and harder without health insurance money to pay your basic needs or food to feed your family you have drank the cool-aid so throughout that you blame your self and the poor (most likely from you ignorance I am guessing yourself included but in your mind separate). You're a sheep and you don't even know it baaaahhh
Liberals only :) - Provide rationale for each of the following basic tenets of contemporary liberalism.?
1. Death for babies but life for mass murderers 2. Take from those who have and give to those who don't (why isn't the proverb to 'give a man a fish, he eats for a day, teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime' incorporated with handouts for the inept/unable) 3. Monopolies are bad but government monopolies are good 4. Religion is bad but spirituality is good 5. Marijuana is great but tobacco is bad 6. Patriotism and pride in one's country is bad but burning a flag is patriotic 7. Gay marriage is a civil rights issue but polygamy is not (pending both deal with consenting adults) The next ones are other things I would just like to understand better so just an analysis of why each is good is great! 8. Kids should be taught to use condoms very early 9. The family is ONLY a societal construction and bigoted towards women 10. How can you possibly think raising taxes on companies is good for an economy? (If the company wants profit it will either fire workers or raise prices)
Why do conservatives hate "handouts"?
Every nation has a threshold of poverty below which it will not allow its people to go, a point beyond which the poverty shocks the conscience and the state takes action to alleviate it at taxpayer expense. For the United States, that threshold is absolute starvation. It will tolerate homelessness, but not people dying for lack of food. For most of the Western European nations, that threshold is higher. For some of the world, it is lower--in part because the money is not available to support the population even if they are starving to death. Of course, there's plenty of money in the US."Handout" is a conservative characterization of whatever mechanism the nation uses to maintain that minimum threshold. They feel that nobody should receive anything in life if they do not deserve it, and of course then you can split all kinds of hairs about who deserves what. In the USA, for example, it is the Food Stamp program. Conservative lawmakers are proposing to get rid of the program because they see people being given food when other people have to work to buy food. The recipients of food stamps don't deserve the food because they didn't work for it.The trouble with the conservative viewpoint is that it lowers the acceptable threshold of poverty to zero. If, in their opinion, you don't deserve assistance, then you should simply starve to death, and that's OK with them because at least nobody else was forced to pay for your food. It's better, in their viewpoint, for people to starve than for other people to be required to help prevent them from starving. Some conservative communities have even made it illegal for private citizens to give away food of their own to the hungry.The liberal viewpoint is that the entire community has a collective responsibility to maintain that minimum threshold, and indeed that has been what the whole developed world has been doing since the end of the Second World War. There is no question of "deserving." People deserve food because they are human beings, whether they can work for it or not. And clothing, and shelter. Not everybody has to live in a palace or wear silk. But there needs to be a minimum standard. The USA is lagging sadly behind in raising its poverty threshold because of all these conservatives who are more concerned about who is "deserving" and making sure none of their money goes to anybody "undeserving."The conservative view is essentially cruel and judgmental and lacks empathy for those less fortunate.
Why do people say 'liberal' like it's a bad thing?
Because right-wingers have turned liberal into the new Jew, since viewing Jews as they did in the 1930s is out of style. This has been caused by the neocon violently oppositional views of communism, which they turned toward anyone who doesn't agree with their views, once communism fell, and they found themselves without a target to persecute. Right-wingers always have to have a devil to have purpose.
Is the United States getting more conservative?
Yes and no, depending on perspective and issues. Conservatives note that abortion has not been banned and that gay rights have achieved a great deal of acceptance, which would have been unimaginable 30 years ago. They May say this began with school prayer court decisions. You will have to ask them.It is a great sign of our increasing polarization that each side has such a fundamentally different view of recent US history.My perspective is that the country has become much more conservative beginning with the popular repudiation of the great society and the conversion of the Republican party into a conservative party, highlighted by Reagan them Gingrich. Now even the New Deal achievements are crumbling and there is no support for financing any grand or new projects, Obamacare being the last since medicare. Infrastructure is deteriorating. Imagine if public libraries did not yet exist. Can you imagine any support for building them?FDR and his generation saw “we the people” acting together through their government to be compassionate and to strive to accomplish great things together. Now others see “we the people” as apart from the goverment to be protected from the government. I perceive little sense that we are all in the same boat together. God help us if we ever have another depression. I cannot ser our America working together. Or any compassion for those not of our group.
Why does our society become more socially liberal over time instead of more socially conservative?
If you check out political maps of the USA, you'll see a very strong correlation between urbanism and liberalism, and between rural and conservatism. That is, people living in cities tend to be liberal, and people living in rural areas tend to be conservative. I would suggest that being exposed to and living with peoples very different from you will tend to promote plurality and social acceptance, which is the foundation of liberalism. Meanwhile, living in rural areas where social contact is likely to be only with people similar to their own kind is going to have the opposite effect. Have said that, the reason why society "become more socially liberal over time" is simply because more and more people are becoming urbanized. That is, not only there are more people in absolute numbers are living in cities, but the percentage of Americans living in cities has also been on the rise. As one example, Texas is notoriously a conservative state. Yet, I am already hearing complaints from Texans that "liberal Californians are taking over Dallas!" But in fact, this is a pattern often repeated in other such "conservative" states.