Fascistic Slogans

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
are too unlike all those uberconformist rightists.

Most people are conformists, left and right. Even the so called "non-conformists" are conformists.

[Barnabas]

Originally posted by Last Conformist

It still does in the sane part of the world.

It still means that in latin america, here leftists hate liberals, and you will always see commies ranting on how evil neo-liberalism is.

Liberal is like the word football, it means different things in the USA and in the rest of the world.

[snoopy369]

Berz, why do you hate america

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Brachy-Pride
Liberal is like the word football, it means different things in the USA and in the rest of the world.

That's just because the rest of the world refuses to use the correct name of "soccer."

[Victor Galis]

It's funny how I was all for big government until Bush & co. got in power.

[Zkribbler]

Big government as a watchdog over corporate excesses.

Big government as an aider and abetter of corporate excesses.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Victor Galis
It's funny how I was all for big government until Bush & co. got in power.

Sig test.

[Victor Galis]

Thing is, I'm all for big government in a country that elects somewhat sane and somewhat competent politicians. They don't have to be perfect to make it work, but Bush & cronies are well... something entirely different I wouldn't trust those guys to govern a small town, much less the whole country.

[Sandman]

sane and somewhat competent politicians

Yes, but they'd probably be fancypants intellectuals, rather than folksy, honest, homespun crooks.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Victor Galis
Thing is, I'm all for big government in a country that elects [people I agree with].

Why would you assume that power is always going to be held that people you agree with? The real test is if you don't mind if the levers of power of the big government you claim to like are held by people you don't like. If you don't want them to have such power and claim to prefer limited government now, why should such a feeling change with the political winds?

[Nubclear]

Perhaps he doesn't value democracy intrinsically?

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Why would you assume that power is always going to be held that people you agree with? The real test is if you don't mind if the levers of power of the big government you claim to like are held by people you don't like. If you don't want them to have such power and claim to prefer limited government now, why should such a feeling change with the political winds?

No, the assumption was that the American people aren't in general stupid. Electing Bush twice fails that test miserably. I don't claim to like limited government, nor have I ever claimed this. There are perfectly sane and reasonable people, whose policies I would disagree with, without fearing what will happen if they came to power. Religious fundies, idiots, etc. are not part of that group.

This does bring me to my other realization. Being pro-big government can mean lots of things to different people. Being for a cradle to grave set of social programs is not the same as being pro-police state. There are plenty of "big governments" run by dictators that do nothing for their people, and there are plenty of "big governments" that tax heavily and redistribute wealth through social programs. I'm more for the latter.

Perhaps he doesn't value democracy intrinsically?

Well, that too. Democracy is only as good as the people it elects (or as good as the people it allows us to remove from office are bad). It's sole merit really is that a really bad leader can often be removed.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Victor Galis
... there are plenty of "big governments" that tax heavily and redistribute wealth through social programs...

I prefer the phrase "more properly distribute the wealth."

[DinoDoc]

Semantics. Means the same thing, Z.

[Zkribbler]

So. I'm not anti-semantic.