Great Liberals in History

"??????????????????????????????????????????????????



OK I got nothing. Anyone else?

 

On balance, the Founders were liberals....of the "Lockean" variety. Modern "liberals" are nothing of the sort....they're authoritarian state collectivists.... who deceitfully adopted "progressive" after Ronald Reagan effectively made their bastardized, deceitful abuse of the term "liberal" a dirty word.

Chameleons.

 

FDR, Harry Truman, Hubert Humphrey, Robert Kennedy, Ted Kennedy, that guy who ran against Eisenhower and lost twice.

Those are the liberal heroes.

LBJ doesn't make the list despite the War on Poverty because he was responsible for the Vietnam War.

And to be fair, a lot of Republicans should be liberal heroes, but liberals hate liberal Republicans even though they're liberal.

For example, Nixon was very liberal, but liberals hated him anyway.

 

You're all reactionaries.

The term "liberal" is now a term of political abuse in the US so it has had to be discarded for the most part and the term "progressive" used instead. But the reactionaries have fooled themselves by having progressives get rid of the term "liberal". No longer do progressives have to secretly worry about the pantywaist association with "liberal", progressive works very nicely.

Your Founding Fathers weren't "liberals" they were radicals, progressives, men of vision, not fearful conservatives or angry, flailing reactionaries.

 

Progressive is a word that doesn't make any sense. Liberals don't want progress, they want to destroy it. Basically, they want to shut down the entire capitalist system and put us back into the dark ages. That's what global warming is about, an excuse to shut down all the factories and stop people from using automobiles. They would have us all living in grass huts and plowing our fields with oxen.

 

This will be a short thread.

 

Dont give up your day job

 

Depends on how inclusive you make the definition of "Liberal"

The Greedy, Racist, Intolerant, Power-Lusty, Control-Freak, Totalitarian thugs we call "Liberals" in 2013, would be thought of as anything but "Liberals" even in the 1960s. I know, I was there!

If you exclude the "Neo-Liberals", who are anything but Classically Liberals, and start with the older, much wiser definition...

Plato, Socrates, Aristophanes, Marcus Aurelius, Galileo, Thomas Moore, Descartes, Thomas Jefferson, Teddy Roosevelt, Gandhi, JFK, Dr. King....

I could spend HOURS and HOURS describing the great contributions of Classic Liberals.

Most of the Great Men and Women of History would be considered Classic Liberals.

-

 

You right-wingers are always mouthing off about how all liberals are Nazis, so I don't know, Hermann Goering maybe?

 

Lets see....

Start with anyone who supported the Declaration of Independence. All were wide eyed liberals of their day. There most certainly were a large Conservative faction at the time that wished to stay loyal to the Crown. Those loyalists have largely now been written out of history by the winners but were undoubtedly a force in their time.

Next most significant would have to be Lincoln. Presiding over a civil war to enforce radical change, I don't know how you get more radical than that.

Both Roosevelts have to fall into the category. Teddy was rather a wild renegade at the time and forced a how whole new way to view public lands held in trust. Of course FDR remade the role of Government when it mattered most and our country underwent a fundamental change during his terms.

Of course LBJ was a self defined Socialist and his Great Society is still probably the peak of liberal achievement thus far.

I'd probably put Teddy at the head of the Kennedy clan just from longevity and long term impact. I don't think he was nearly as committed to radical change as much as Robert, but his long influence in the Senate will be felt longer in history than even John's abbreviated term.

There are hundreds of others that have influenced history but I can't think of other Americans that have had as much impact.

Thanks for asking.

 

there is a book written on this subject already..i read it last night before going to sleep..it was 200 pages long..only problem it was all blank pages..

 

Don't be so sure and proud of yourself.

For most of History, what we think of as Classic Conservatives have been responsible for some of the worst actions in human history.

Consider the persecution of Galileo, was that not at the hands of frightened and threatened Religious Conservatives?

How about those who forced the "Proscription" of Socrates?

What about the Ludites who created the need and meaning for the word "Sabotage"?

How about the Establishment Corrupt Religious Conservatives who inspired the colony efforts of the "Pilgrims"?

How about the Establishment Corrupt Religious Conservatives who crucified Jesus?

Do not be too quick to judge.

-

 

Wow, you're right. "Conservatives" are responsible for everything bad that's ever happened, because you've defined the word to include anyone who's ever done anything bad.

 

Oh yeah I mean in the Current American definition of the world which is the exact opposite of liberal. That is why I try to use words like leftist, statist etc...

 

No, I define conservatives as those people whose natural inclination is to preserve or conserve that which already exists in society. They tend to be naturally skeptical and resistance to change. Additionally, a Conservative is someone who places a high value on Industry, Self-reliance, Traditions, Religious Ritual, and Family Values.


This is both good and bad. They don't fall for fads or snake oil, but the also are slow to adopt new innovations and ideas.

They are Industrious, but sometimes lack knowledge on how to let loose and have FUN!

They are self-reliant, but sometimes fail to see the value of collaborative public projects.

They are served well by the wisdom in holding to their Traditions, but sometimes are resistant to let them go when their time has past.

They maintain a consciousness of piety, humility and service to others through Religious Ritual, but sometimes can be observant of the Ritual, without being observant of the philosophical meaning under/behind the Ritual, and thereby loose some of their spirituality in pursuit of Ritual or introspection.

They maintain a healthy respect and knowledge of the value in the nuclear family and its traditional gender roles, mechanisms of self-regulation and responsibilities, but can, at times be pig-headed about accepting other families of a less traditional even when all evidence is that the new model is working relatively well.

Traditional Conservatives and Classical Liberals are the Ying and Yang of functional societies for most of recorded history. You can't have a healthy society without both in large and nearly match measure.

I respect and honor both, and find myself acting first as one, and then the other, as the situation requires...

I suppose that makes me some kind of centrist tie breaker role? I think we call that "Libertarian".


Note that nowhere in the Ying-Yang, and sigmoid line between, is there room for the disruption of either Neo-Liberals, or Far-Right Fascists.



-

 

-

Was Jesus a Liberal?

Or a Back to fundamentals of Faith Conservative.

I think I'm pretty sure about how Moses would be categorized.

-

 

Thread does not meet guidelines for thread creation

Shangrila
Site Moderator