Thread: Why are so many liberals/progressives reluctant to call themselves "liberal"?

I believe we should be able to insist that our elected representatives bear true witness to our own laws, simply to fix that moral Standard in any office of public trust under the United States.

Why are so many liberals/progressives reluctant to call themselves "liberal"?

"Liberals" arent really liberal in the real sense of the word. Libertarians are. So-called "liberals" and conservatives are nowadays fairly equal when it comes to support for liberty, or maybe even conservatives are more inclined to. They just want to restrict different things. Social democrats is a more fitting label, IMHO.

Originally Posted by Sturmgeist

I often wonder if forums like these always attract the fringe of every position. I wonder if these forums just tend to attract only these kind of people (I don't count myself out of this concept).

I wonder what a forum like this would look like if it attracted 'average Joe's', so to speak.

Finally, I wonder if the 'average Joe's' are here but rarely blast their keyboards with the rhetorical tripe that he rest of us seem to endlessly perpetuate.

As to the last thing you wrote, does this forum provide evidence that anarchism is doomed to failure?

This forum provides evidence that anarchism is not only alive but it is burning brightly. The fire is seen here every time i log on. With the revolutionists against their goverment. The nationalists against everyone not of their nation. The politically dissatisfied using the slander and slur.

This topic shows this all too well. With the forum members fighting over word definations like pirates after the last barrel of rum.

Does anyone else believe we may be better off with morals tests instead of drug tests?

Originally Posted by GeneralZod

This forum provides evidence that anarchism is not only alive but it is burning brightly. The fire is seen here every time i log on. With the revolutionists against their goverment. The nationalists against everyone not of their nation. The politically dissatisfied using the slander and slur.

This topic shows this all too well. With the forum members fighting over word definations like pirates after the last barrel of rum.

We have the convenience of no violence here. Violence is the great equalizer...sort of

Originally Posted by danielpalos

Does anyone else believe we may be better off with morals tests instead of drug tests?

Moralistic testing has already be done in this topic. With that Bar graph showing colour triangles to political idealology.

If expect more. maybe in for a dissapointment.

What is your opinion of petitioning a Pope for a contingent of subject matter specialists, to inquire into the moral rectitude of any elected representatives claiming those religious morals?

Oh I LOVE this one! It's simple.
Intelligent people define Liberals as being those with overwhelmingly Liberal views on virtually every subject.
Now there ARE ignorant whackjobs of every view and they're easy to spot: If you don't march with them in perfect lockstep on every issue and current event, then certain idiots will immediately label you a "Liberal". Now keep in mind, this doesn't apply to ALL Conservatives any more than it does to ALL Liberals. I have been called Leftist Liberal and also Neo-Con Corporatist by the truly stupid from both camps.
And there it is.
Ya see, someone who agrees with Conservatives ALL the time is called...... a Conservative. Duh.
Someone who ALWAYS agress with Liberal is called a what? Yes! That's right! A Liberal! Very good. Now we're rolling.
And finally someone whose views are Independent from party / ideology and often cross both would be called what?
That's right. An independent.
The easiest way to spot someone who thinks Independently, is to ask them the five things they think The Dems have done best. And the Five things they thinks Repubs have done best. Or the five best Liberal and Conservative concepts or achievements.

So while my views on gun ownership, unions, Islam being favored over Christianity by government, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Nuclear power, domestic & offshore drilling, parenting & family values, many aspects of education, ObamaCare, advanced interrogation (not water-boarding though - ony because it's ineffective), the abuse of welfare and so on are Conservative, many of my other views are quite Liberal.

But again, the really mindless drones who have the Orwelian view that one must agree with The Party on ALL things, are so stupid, they often label me "Liberal".
Just like two people on the extreme Left here insist I'm a corporatist conservative shill.
I laugh at all of them!

Originally Posted by Brewskier

I've seen this many times here on PF. "Independent" people who side with the left's viewpoint on virtually every issue will object when someone refers to them as a "liberal". There are several members who selected usernames meant to bolster their independent, unaffiliated status, yet you would not suspect, based on their posts, that they are anything but typical, run-of-the-mill liberals.

I just don't understand the reluctance to self-identify. I am not conservative on quite a few issues, yet I still call myself a conservative, and I don't correct people when they call me one. It it just typical liberal arrogance, where they feel too unique and special to identify as one of the hive? I suspect it has something to do with the ideology of liberalism, which downplays the role of the individual and promotes a collectivist mindset. Some liberals resist that to the point of overcompensation (by selecting grandstanding usernames, for example).

Perhaps not everyone defines themselves into convenient little blanket philosophies.

It is much easier to assume that someone has identical positions on everything identical to a party line. Easier to assume, easier to argue against them, and easier to assign them positions.

However, not everyone fits a label as others define it.

Originally Posted by danielpalos

What is your opinion of petitioning a Pope for a contingent of subject matter specialists, to inquire into the moral rectitude of any elected representatives claiming those religious morals?

I am not religious.

If the moralistic religious dogmatic believers want to prove themselves. They can dance naked around large fires while singing Elvis tunes. Whoever is last standing, gets the job.