| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | '''American liberalism''' is a political ideology that dominates the [[Democratic Party]]. Its great heroes include [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]], [[Eleanor Roosevelt]], and [[Martin Luther King]]. | | '''American liberalism''' is a political ideology that dominates the [[Democratic Party]]. Its great heroes include [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]], [[Eleanor Roosevelt]], and [[Martin Luther King]]. |
| | | | |
| | + | |
| | + | [[Democrats]] and most media outlets in the [[U.S.]] are blatantly liberal.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mrc.org/biasbasics/biasbasics1.asp|title=Media Bias basics|publisher=[[Media Research Center]]}}</ref> Liberalism in North America today practices three primary tactics to attack the Republican Party, and sometimes to attack American values in general. These three liberal tactics can be pronounced using the following [[acronym]]: SIN. Liberals (1) '''s'''hift the subject, they (2) '''i'''gnore the facts, and they (3) '''n'''ame call.<ref>Scott Baker. [http://www.theblaze.com/stories/did-herman-cain-give-the-dont-miss-speech-at-cpac/ Did Herman Cain Give the ‘Don’t Miss’ Speech at CPAC?], ''[[The Blaze]], February 12, 2011.</ref><ref>[[YouTube]]. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N3-j3HM7-A& Herman Cain: "Stupid People Are Ruining America"], February 11, 2011.</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | * Liberals typically support a "mixed" economy, a policy similar to that of [[fascism]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://fora.tv/2008/01/30/Liberal_Traits_of_Fascism|title=Video discussion about how modern liberalism is actually fascist by author Jonah Goldberg.}}</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | * Liberals claimed a monopoly on [[compassion]], [[decency]], and [[social justice]] (as defined by themselves), posing as the sole defenders of [[civic virtue]] against a horde of backwoodsmen, racists, and religious fanatics. [http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/03/the_disgrace_of_liberalism.html] |
| | + | {{cquote|There's another goal, from my point of view, which is to try to lay the groundwork for a radical political force which would conceive of itself as distinctly to the left of moderate, reformist American liberals. And that has two aspects. One is to try to change that liberalism, to transform it by analysis, critique, and activism; the second is to build a radical movement which would be an autonomous force in its own right, which would be distinct from the traditional American liberal consensus. This radical part of the program involves not simply supporting the liberal students against conservative students and conservative professors, but trying to act on them, to push them to the left. It also involves trying to find and support, even trying to help create, networks of radical students in law school and of radical professors around the country — students and teachers who see themselves as wanting to go a lot further than most people want to go.<ref>[http://66.218.69.11/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=liberal+teachers&fr=yfp-t-501&fp_ip=MX&u=duncankennedy.net/documents/Liberal%2520Values%2520in%2520Legal%2520Education.pdf&w=liberal+liberals+teachers+teacher&d=BNZFhPReRjC1&icp=1&.intl=us Liberal Values in Legal Education] Duncan Kennedy (professor at Harvard Law School)</ref>}} |
| | + | |
| | + | ===Liberal Rankings of Congress Members=== |
| | + | The National Journal compiles the votes of each congress member each year and uses the information to create rankings<ref>[http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/index.htm How the House voted]</ref> of how liberal each member of the United States [[Congress]] is. In addition to showing the voting records of each member and given an overall all ranking of liberalness, the National Journal also ranks congress members by liberalness in the areas of social, economic, and foreign policy. |
| | + | |
| | + | === American liberalism, demographics and expected tipping point in the decline of American liberalism === |
| | + | ''See also:'' [[American atheism]] and [[Decline of atheism]] and [[Global atheism]] |
| | + | |
| | + | Due to the explosive growth of [[global Christianity]] in traditional cultures and their influence on Western [[Christianity]] and the higher birth rate of [[Conservative Christianity|conservative Christians]] and religious conservatives, social conservatism is expected to rise. |
| | + | |
| | + | The Birkbeck College, University of London professor Eric Kaufman wrote in his 2010 book ''Shall the Righteous Inherit the Earth?'' concerning America: |
| | + | {{cquote|High evangelical fertility rates more than compensated for losses to liberal Protestant sects during the twentieth century. In recent decades, white secularism has surged, but Latino and Asian religious immigration has taken up the slack, keeping secularism at bay. Across denominations, the fertility advantage of religious fundamentalists of all colours is significant and growing. After 2020, their demographic weight will to tip the balance in the [[Culture War|culture wars]] towards the conservative side, ramping up pressure on hot-button issues such as abortion. By the end of the century, three quarters of America may be pro-life. Their activism will leap over the borders of the 'Redeemer Nation' to evangelize the world. Already, the rise of the World Congress of Families has launched a global religious right, its arms stretching across the bloody lines of the War on Terror to embrace the entire Abrahamic family.<ref>[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/05/why-are-years-2012-and-2020-key-years.html Why are 2012 and 2020 key years for Christian creationists and pro-lifers?]</ref>}} |
| | | | |
| | [[Category:Liberalism]] | | [[Category:Liberalism]] |