I am not familiar with that subject, but I am interested to know if they have been mistreated. I’ll look into that.
However I have a correction for you Jan, and I’m not trying to rag you or anything, just to post info: The US is more moderate-to-conservative than it is liberal. It is Europe that is more liberal than conservative.
I am not familiar with that subject, but I am interested to know if they have been mistreated. I’ll look into that.
However I have a correction for you Jan, and I’m not trying to rag you or anything, just to post info: The US is more moderate-to-conservative than it is liberal. It is Europe that is more liberal than conservative.[/quote]
How does that relate to Jan’s post?
I am sure that foreign military men have been mistreated in one way or another by many nations. I can think of, off the top of my head, the US mistreatment of Black soldiers by discrimination in to WWII and unpaid pensions to WWI soldiers, and for Britian with the poor pensions of the Gurkhas. I would imagine therefore that members of the French Foreign Legion have seen similar injustices, but I am not knowledgable about them. Although, I have heard that French Officers treated them as 2nd class soldiers and citizens in many cases. If anyone knows more about that please post on it.
“Liberal” as different meanings as you cross the atlantic. By the UK/European definition, the Republican party is the most Liberal party in the US. The classic definition has always been that Liberals are in favour of the highest possible level of democracy and minimal state interference in people’s lives. What you are describing as “Liberal” would be regarded as socialism of one form or another in Europe.
Hence the French rejecting the EU constitution for being “too liberal”. By the European definition, the US, UK, Ireland and Eastern Europe are Liberal, while the rest is more Socialist.
The term is being warped slowly towards the American definition though.
I tend to clarify it by using “classical liberal” or the US term “libtertarian”.
Moment, by German definition the Liberal party, the FDP, is a centrist party. They advocate free speech, freedom of religion, respectively the total neutrality of the government concerning religion, but also at the same time total freedom for entrepreneurs, low taxes, no labour laws (working hours, minimum pay, trade unions) and free immigration (often thoufght by others to get a cheap pool of labour). They are a rtelatively small party and mostly voted for by entrepreneurs. The conservatives (CDU and the Bavarian CSU) are in support of free market only as long as it helps the traditional elites. They are anti immigration, nationalist and have strong support in rural areas.
The Social democrats are moderate left, have ALWAYS been pro democracy( as the oldest democratic party in Germany they have been persecuted several times, both under the Kaiser and the Nazis). They traditionally represent the traditional blue collar workers, the guys who want a fair pay for a fair day’s work, with a strong work ethics, but have been influenced since the 1970s by leftwing intellectuals, now form ing the left wing of this party. The Socialdemocrats tend to represent the urban population.
The Greens are one hand supporting traditional values, but on the other hand want to preserve the enviroment.
The Party of the Democratic Socialists is the old East German communist party, after it kicked out the hardcore Stalinists and changed it’s name. They claim today to follow a strictly democratic program, and observation by the Department for the Protection of the Constitution, Germany’s internal intelligence service hasn’t found anything to the contrary so far, though they have a few lunatics on the fringes, notably a group calling themselves Communist Platform, leaded by a woman, Sarah Wagenknecht, who styles herself even in her looks and way she dresses like Rosa Luxemburg of the attempted 1919 revolution. But even within her own party she is considered to be a freak.
Jan
I am not familiar with that subject, but I am interested to know if they have been mistreated. I’ll look into that.
However I have a correction for you Jan, and I’m not trying to rag you or anything, just to post info: The US is more moderate-to-conservative than it is liberal. It is Europe that is more liberal than conservative.[/quote]
Google “Balitang Beterano”, the veteran’s organisation of the Philippines.
Jan
Aah, the Greens - they’re like watermelons: green on the outside, red on the inside. An insidious bunch.
I like green, I wore it for so long it’s my favourite colour. Green is nice, green is cuddly, green is good.
“Liberal” as different meanings as you cross the atlantic. By the UK/European definition, the Republican party is the most Liberal party in the US. The classic definition has always been that Liberals are in favour of the highest possible level of democracy and minimal state interference in people’s lives.[/quote]
You seem confused. The Democratic Party in the US is the more liberal party, while the Republican Party is the more conservative.. Why you seem twisted up on that is beyond me. Did you know that the majority of Blacks in the US are liberal? Did you know that in the US Blacks are the most liberal ethnic group? Did you know that the overwhelming majority of them also consider themselves to be Democrats? Since you are not from the US, I’ll take it that you confused the two parties because you, well, are from somewhere else, and possible because you read liberal rags.
It doesn’t matter what country you are from, as the agendas and dogmas of the political parties in the US do not change when you cross the border into another country. :roll:
Now I am a US citizen, myself. I’ve lived here 43 years and voted for several presidents. I’m a moderate-to-conservative who considers himself independant. 
Um, no. The liberals and the Democrats are far from socialist in the US.
Read carefully what people write: the term “liberal” still has a different meaning in the UK than the US. It still pretty much has the original meaning in the UK, whereas in the US it has been warped, and the term “Libertarian” had to be introduced to describe the classical liberal position.
The term is also slowly warping in the UK - the Liberal Democrats have turned into an asidious bunch of socialists in the past few years - there’s more “US liberal” in their policies than “classical liberal”, although they’re far far far to the left of any mainstream party in the US (they were proposing a top band of income tax at 50% - which if you include National Insurance on that, it’s 51%. To me, anyone who thinks that the State has a right to more of a pound that you earn than you do is profoundly [classically] illiberal).
In my experience you cannot equate any US political party to a European model. Even the most left wing Democrat is more to the right than most European right wing parties. The term Liberal in no way equates to any socialistic principles.
I also fail to see what Ferrous Hommus was getting at when giving an example of who most Black people vote for, er who do most hispanics vote for then as I see they have just overtaken the Blacks in terms of US population?
“Liberal” as different meanings as you cross the atlantic. By the UK/European definition, the Republican party is the most Liberal party in the US. The classic definition has always been that Liberals are in favour of the highest possible level of democracy and minimal state interference in people’s lives.[/quote]
You seem confused. The Democratic Party in the US is the more liberal party, while the Republican Party is the more conservative.. Why you seem twisted up on that is beyond me. Did you know that the majority of Blacks in the US are liberal? Did you know that in the US Blacks are the most liberal ethnic group? Did you know that the overwhelming majority of them also consider themselves to be Democrats? Since you are not from the US, I’ll take it that you confused the two parties because you, well, are from somewhere else, and possible because you read liberal rags.
It doesn’t matter what country you are from, as the agendas and dogmas of the political parties in the US do not change when you cross the border into another country. :roll:
Now I am a US citizen, myself. I’ve lived here 43 years and voted for several presidents. I’m a moderate-to-conservative who considers himself independant.
Um, no. The liberals and the Democrats are far from socialist in the US.[/quote]
YOU SEEM STUPID. :lol:
READ WHAT HE SAID! :roll:
The word “Liberal” in this context means different things in Europe and the US. He said that the Republican Party was more “liberal” in the European meaning of the word.
In Europe and the UK, the word “liberal” generally means less government, less legislation, less taxation, what you in the US call ‘libertarian’. In this context, a European would regard the Republicans as a more “Liberal” party compared to the Democrats.
Once again, I suggest you read what is written, not what you think is written.
The problem is that currently the ultra-conservative wing of the Republicans is running the show, e.g. the bible thumpers and neo-conservatives dreaming of an American empire.
They are far from being libertarian, huge spending, the government in every bed room, making Christianity a quasi state religion, a strong unilaterist “f*ck you, we are the strongest kid on the block” attitude and keep minorities in their place.
The Democrats have a similar problem with their lunatic left wing fringe.
The problem in the US is that there only two parties and the elective system disadvantages any newcomer. So the two parties have to cover each far ranging positions.
Some of the Southern Democrats (Dixiecrats) are actually more right wing than the Republicans.
Jan
I agree Walther, the current Republican administration seem to be bordering on the right wing Authoritarian end of the scale, as opposed to liberal/libertarian.
Nonetheless, the Republicans have traditionally had the most liberal outlook, whereas the Democrats have been more socialist.
The problem is that while the organisers of election campaigns can always count on the radical fringes to mobilise their voters, many “normal” voters, who normally would vote more centrist often stay at home on voting day. So the campaign organisers cater to the demands of the lunatic fringes of both parties.
Add to this the lobbying by big business through campaign donations, who want a return on their investment after the election and you’ll have the reason why American politics are so f*cked up at the moment. In other countries the political spectrum is spread over a larger number of parties and e.g. in Germany you’ll have limits which keep the nutcases mostlyout of parliament (to be represented in the Bundestag and in most state parliaments, a party must win at least 5 % of the votes. This often kept undesirables like the communists or neo-nazis out).
Jan
Good post, I couldnt have put it better myself, although Id like to see the reaction to it on certain forums such as urban 75. You would be good there.
In the US, the term “libertarian” describes those who are liberal and attempt to use the government to get involved in the promoting of liberal agendas by creating legislation which supports their views. They also attempt to use carefully crafted literature and media formats to inject liberalism into conservative views in an attempt to trick younger conseratives into believing that they are actually more liberal than conservative, and by confusing the issues and meaning of the words “conservative” and “liberal” in their minds, hope to sway them to “grow” into liberals.
I completely agree with you about those who proposed such a tax. That is exceedingly liberal by the US definition of the term.
(my emboldenment)
True that.
Don’t be a pottymouth boy. There is no place for such in here. Keep that for your home.
I see what you guys are saying about the meaning of “liberalism” being different in the US than in the US. Appearently it must be if liberals in the UK are more what we in the US would call conservative. Odd. However, the currently broad definition of liberalism applies more to liberals of the US than to liberals of the UK.
On the current state of liberalism and it’s general meaning today:
"Liberalism today
In general, liberals favor constitutional government, representative democracy and the rule of law. Liberals at various times have embraced both constitutional monarchy and republican government. They are generally opposed to any but the milder forms of nationalism, and usually stand in contrast to conservatives by their broader tolerance and in more readily embracing multiculturalism. Furthermore, they generally favor human rights and civil liberties, especially freedom of speech and freedom of the press (while holding various positions on whether people have an inherent right to the means of economic subsistence). However, the liberal commitment to unrestricted individual liberty is not necessarily absolute: as Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. said, “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre…,” and liberal parties support restrictions on incitement to violence.
Liberals also somewhat believe in a free market and free trade, but they differ in the degree of limited government intervention in the economy which they advocate. In general, government responsibility for health, education and alleviating poverty fits into the policies of most liberal parties. But virtually all of them, even American liberals, tend to believe in a far smaller role for the state than would be supported by most social democrats, let alone socialists or communists.
Liberals generally believe in a neutral government, in the sense that it is not for the state to determine how individuals can pursue happiness. This self-determination gives way to an open mind in ethical questions. Most liberal parties support the ‘pro choice’ movement and advocate equal rights for women and for homosexuals. Equality before the law is crucial in liberal policies, and racism is incompatible with liberalism. All liberal parties are secular, but they differ on the issue of anti-clericalism. Liberal parties in Latin countries tend to be very anti-clerical.
Liberals agree on the idea that society should have very limited interests in the private behavior of its citizens in the areas of private sexual relations, free speech, personal conscience or religious beliefs, as well as political association. Assurance of personal liberties and freedom, particularly in the case of individual expression, is highly important to liberalism. As John Rawls put it, “The state has no right to determine a particular conception of the good life”. The left-wing of liberalism, especially in the United States, considers it fundamental that society has a responsibility to guarantee equal opportunity for each of its citizens. In general, liberals do not believe that the government should directly control any industrial production through state owned enterprises, which places them in opposition to social democrats."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism
By that, the general definition of liberalism today, the term applies more to liberals in the US than it does in the UK, according to what you have said liberalism means in the UK. Considering that, it would seem that the “twisting” of the meaning of liberalism that you describe has taken place in the UK to change the meaning of the term there, and not in the US, since in the US “liberalism” is very much like the genral definition of the term in relation to modern political views around the world.
This changing or twisting of the meaning of liberalism is akin to what we in the US would call “libertarianism”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism
Sigh. Yet again, it’s the other way around. The use of the term “liberal” as being in favour of individual liberty dates back to 1800 or so. Wikipedia cites “Sketches of the State of Manners and Opinions in the French Republic” by Helen Maria Williams in 1801 as the first use of the word, and in there it used the sense of being in favour of individual liberty. The philosophy itself in it’s modern form dates back to at least John Locke (1632-1704). What has basically happened in the US is that the Democratic party has hijacked the term Liberal and used it for their own ends. This has changed the usage of the word in the US, and due to the power US usage has over the English language has started to change it around the world (the Liberal Democrat party in the UK are another example of this - they’re really socialists, but call themselves Liberals).
Please, please do some research before sounding off in future. Here would be a good place to start.