Liberal Internet? - Page 5

On July 05 2010 23:48 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:


I'm sure you'll find someone who says yes somewhere.

On July 05 2010 23:48 HnR)hT wrote:

I don't understand the phrase "the most conservative in the world," since the meaning of conservatism depends on the society you are talking about. For example, in the Soviet Union during the Gorbachev era, hardcore Communists were called "conservative." If you mean they adhere to a particular ideology which we in the West call "conservatism," then as a matter of empicrical statement of fact I cannot agree...

@angelicfolly:
Just because something is legal or illegal doesn't make it morally right or wrong. And just because someone has more money doesn't mean they need more urgent medical attention.

On July 05 2010 23:53 Klive5ive wrote:

Yes you're right.
This thread isn't going to go anywhere since the OP made a mistake by suggesting that Liberal and Conservative views are directly opposed to each other. That simply isn't the case.

In the UK we have a coalition of Conservatives and Liberals working together in government.
Furthermore, the "Liberal Party of Australia" claims to adhere to conservatism.

On July 05 2010 23:40 Klockan3 wrote:

Free market is basically having no rules and no taxes, increasing taxes for things like health care takes you further away from having a free market economy. Of course in many ways having taxes for things like health care is wanted which is why most of the developed world does it that way, a totally free market is no more wanted than a communistic one. In the same way regulations to prevent foul play are also needed etc.

I didn't say that it is bad to be an idealist, nor that it is good to be a realist. What I mean by "realist" by the way are those who wants to make it better for most since you sacrifice much growth to get everyone with you while "idealist" are those who wants to make it better for everyone since they don't think that anyone should be left behind.

Why people vote and what the vote actually means are two different things. The discussions are almost solely about where the states money should come from and how it should be spent, and that is the main difference between the parties.

That was my opinion, your opinion might be different. Welcome to politics. Also trying too hard to reach any ideal is bad, which is why it is called "trying too hard", as such I wasn't wrong with my statement anyway. You might argue that you can't try to hard, but that is another issue.

On July 05 2010 23:24 JinMaikeul wrote:
I think the world has a liberal bias... The reason for this is that liberal policy tends to benefit the poor at the expense of the wealthy and there are a lot more poor people in this world than there are wealthy people.

On July 06 2010 00:09 Mothxal wrote:


Either way, basically everything you've written in this thread is incredibly unclear, since you seem to invent categories and trends and such as you type, and never properly define something. Case in point, free market. A market without rules and taxes doesn't exist, has never existed, nobody wants it (including actual rightwing policy prescriptions), and it won't work. If you use free market with that (inane) definition, you can't take it seriously. The term has mostly been used as rightwing propoganda, so you should be careful to simply adopt it in your line of thinking.

On July 06 2010 00:07 Jibba wrote:

It makes it even worse when you capitalize them like that, because liberal and Liberal, and conservative and Conservative are different things.

I'm convinced that 99% of the internet, TL included, doesn't know the difference, however.

On July 06 2010 00:10 Djzapz wrote:
Smart people tend to lean towards the left =P

Look at the majority of the very smart people! Big claim I know but it's interesting to look into. It's surprising.

On July 06 2010 00:12 D10 wrote:


When I look at US politics, its really weird, because theres only 2 sides, but the right goes out of their way to look like a bunch of stupid rednecks making politics with the bible, while the left goes out of their way to look like they are actually the middle of everything and a place everyone would like to be, except most people will see it for what it really is, a bunch of cowards making the politics of pleasing everyone and leaving no one happy.

On July 06 2010 00:11 tryummm wrote:
Very interesting viewpoint. I have studied the works of people like Napoleon Hill who have studied hundreds of rich people. Not a single one of them came out of poverty by being given money. Wallace D. Wattles actually points out that charity creates more poverty and does absolutely no good in the long term. Instead, he suggests the poor should be taught how to accumulate wealth by studying rich people.


Where are you getting your information?

On July 06 2010 00:19 Jibba wrote:

Politics is a lot more than about what people say. I wish more people realized it. The institutional forces are often much more important than anything else. Most things are much more of secular, power calculations than you'd realize from just watching the news.

On July 06 2010 00:13 tryummm wrote:

Didn't see any credible sources backing up your claims. Please give me the sources you used to derive those claims.