Talk:Liberal

From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ylmw21 (talk | contribs) at 03:34, April 24, 2007. It may differ significantly from current revision.
Jump to navigation Jump to search
! Due to the controversial nature of this article, it has been locked by the Administrators to prevent edit wars or vandalism.
Sysops, please do not unlock it without first consulting the protecting sysop.
Conservlogo.png

Talk:Liberal/Arch1 Talk:Liberal/Arch2

Wikipedia Citations

  • It is never acceptable to use citations from Wikipedia here on the Conservapedia, per Aschlafly

Andy... falsehoods?

Andy, I can't find anything wrong with the paragraph that you deleted. It properly contrasts the difference between "liberal" in the classical economic sense, and "liberal" in the TV-punditry sense. It also appropriately treated the civil rights era. Is the only thing wrong with that paragraph that you don't like it's implications?-AmesGyo! 11:47, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Where do we go to report vandalism by a mod? --BobD 02:20, 16 April 2007 (EDT)


opposition to a strong American foreign policy
where in that WORK IN PROGRESS [1] cited, can proof of the above claim be found? Define a strong American foreign policy? Many Liberals may disagree with the current foreign policy but that doesn't necessarily imply they have problems with a strong American foreign policy. What is the definition of a strong American foreign policy? In all fairness it must be said that the page does start with Many of the following views are held by Americans who consider themselves 'liberals so virtually anything could be added to the list. All the same such edits seem to be what the editor thinks liberals believe and are not an encyclopedic description of liberal thoughts or tendencies. Such edits contravene Commandment 5: Do not post personal opinion on an encyclopedia entry.
WhatIsG0ing0n 06:47, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
It is time someone unlocks this article. User:Order 17 April, 11:25 (AEST)

The statement that the label liberal stands for right-wing in Europe is utter nonsense. Neo-liberalism restricts the more general liberalism to economic topics. As a result, neo-liberals and conservatives have much in common regarding freedom of economy and influence of the state. This is, however, far from right-wing. A separate topic is the nationalliberal movement in Austria, which includes some right-wing, anti-foreigner standpoints.

First, I have to agree that 'liberal' in Europe doesn't refer to the extreme right. The FPOE under Haider was indeed a bit far to the right when compared to the other liberal parties. However, the Dutch VVD, the Danish Ventre Parti, or the Polish Platforma Obywatelska, or the German FDP are all center to center right. And they are characteristic for an important poltical force, the self-identify as 'liberal'. It should be added that some countries have in addition a, often smaller, center-left liberal party. User:Order 20 April 23:55 (AEST)

Neoclassical liberalism

I'm not sure that "sexual freedom" was an aspect of neoclassical liberalism. Ditto for equal rights independent of race or sex. The Enlightenment liberals were for limited democracy -- they certainly did not jump to extend these rights to women or non-whites. In fact, many even feared giving power to the lower classes. Ylmw21 23:34, 23 April 2007 (EDT)