Why keep calling them "Liberals" ?

We've been through this a thousand times.

Leftism and progressivism are the farthest thing possible from "liberal".

Sure, some dems/leftists may believe they are humanitarians, but this, by no means equates to "liberalism".

In their misguided efforts to appear as if they have a heart, they support tyrannical intrusions into every facet of society's civil freedoms and liberties.

After all... What could be More humanitarian than recognizing an Individual's freedom to live life without the pressures of heartless collectivist forced compliance to an oppressor?

They want no part of anything like that.

Leftism is authoritarianism, hidden beneath the guise of protection and solidarity for the common man.

The founding fathers were liberals. Libertarians who wrote about real freedom.

NEWS FLASH:
Communism is not Freedom. Socialism is not Freedom. Collectivism is Death.

 

Then why start on the 1001 time. If no one believes you the first thousand times, chances are you are wrong

 

They co-opted "liberal" early in the 20th Century after "progressive" got the stink of death upon it. They re-branded themselves (successfully) so the title still holds a position within the common vernacular.

They are leftist, godless, control freaks (read Bloomberg).

 

Nor are the conservatives who want a smaller government really conservative by traditional definition.

 

Indeed, minions of the devil, it could be argued.

- - - Updated - - -

That's fine. I don't respect them either. They facing left as well.

 

because there are various definitions of the term "liberal"

 

Yes. Inaccurate definitions. Hijacked labels.

 

you don't get to judge which definitions are inaccurate

 

History decides. Modern "liberals" are not liberals at all. This is not debatable.

Hundreds of years of established recognized history clearly verify this.

 

modern liberals are not the same as what past liberals were. but they are still liberals according to valid definitions of the word.

 

Liberal= telling me I'm not allowed to buy a large soda in NYC???

Liberal = forcing unnecessary and dangerous vaccinations into children's bloodstreams???

Liberal = executive action after executive action to strip amerika of its civil liberties?

 

LOL - Thats called a doctor

 

conservative= running huge deficits during times of economic plenty and telling the voter that deficits don't matter??

 

Perhaps part of the problem is that people will throw the term "liberal" around as an insult, even towards people who explicitly reject the label. I can't tell you how often I get accused of being a "liberal" by conservatives ( and oddly enough a "conservative" by liberals), despite the fact that I make it abundantly clear that I stand opposed to liberalism. Honestly though, both the Democrats and Republicans evolved from liberalism, and both are deserving of the term " neo-liberal", at least in practice.

While we are at it, I suggest giving the term "libertarian" back to the anti-authoritarian communists and socialists, as it was stolen by laizzez faire extremists.

 

I wouldn't recommend it, recently got diarrhoea from a coke I accidentally ordered larger. Going to avoid coke from now on. it's probably almost as bad for you as vaccinations.

 

Not to mention.....

Liberal = telling you what kind of guns and ammo you can own

Liberal = controlling whether or not you can circumcize your child

Liberal = enforcing indoor smoking bans on private businesses

Liberal = enforcing outdoor smoking bans in cities and parks

Liberal = suspending kids from school for chewing a pop tart into the shape of a gun

Liberal = outlawing pets! (really, San Francisco? )

 

Actually we can all pick and choose whatever definitions suits our fancy. It semantics. Liberal: a flesh eating mongrel. Conservative: a boat anchor. Whatever...

 

As someone could probably be called left, I agree that you shouldn't harm your children.

 

Liberal = stealing your money to buy votes

 

I respect the fact that youre honest enough to openly declare your love for dictatorship style tyranny.

But I would argue that the term "libertarian" belongs to anarchists or at least the tea party types, and should not be associated with commu/socialism, as these systems are nothing more than dictatorship styled tyrannies, bent on oppressing the masses through the illusion of collectivism.

 

I tried that at Democraticunderground.com I told them I'm a Thomas Payne Liberal. The banned me. Today Democrats aren't liberals. Their socialists.

 

......what? I'm an anarchist....

Anarchism (I agree "libertarian belongs to the anarchists) has nothing to do with "tea party types". From Proudhon right up until the 1950s, Anarchism had always been the anti-authoritarian wing of socialist thought, and was inherently opposed to capitalism. Most anarchists ARE socialists or communists, even today.

BTW, the first person to use the term "libertarian" as a self descriptor of ideology, was a communist anarchist.

 

I'm a fan of dictatorship tyranny. I find it amusing.

 

Forgive my error in dubbing you authoritarian.

But communism is inherently tyrannical, as the Few control the Many.

I still can't wrap my head around this apparent oxymoron of communist anarchism.

 

The few always control the many. Sometimes it's just less direct.