Conservatism and Liberalism

[Pandemonium]

Why is that terms such as Conservatism and Liberalism are synonymous with economics when they are social terminology?

A conservative is someone that propagates a continuation of a belief system. Where as a liberal is more willing to accept societal change.

I can understand when people call themselves a fiscal conservative. Alternatively I am dumbfounded when a person calls them self a conservative when they advocate economic liberalism. They just do not correlate.

Am I the only person with this problem?

Could it be that American use of language is confusing me?

(I would like to call myself a conservative but also a marxist.) jks*

[mmw]

"Conservative" and "Liberal" are very American terms in the context you are referring to them. The rest of the world generally correlates liberalism with free market economics as in classical liberalism.

[Warrior]

I think it is because in common usage today the two terms are have evolved to include a lot more than they originally did. Today, conservatives consider the term to cover the entire range of social, economic, and other parts of life.

I find it odd when someone says they are a fical conservative but socially liberal (or vice versa). Either be a conservative or not. Sometimes I get the impression that those that say this don't understand one term or the other (or perhaps both). The definitions you used, while technically correct, don't really reflect conservatives today (I'm not sure about liberals).

[Tyrant Soup]

I find it odd when someone says they are a fical conservative but socially liberal (or vice versa). Either be a conservative or not.

Why? What's wrong with cherry picking the policies you like?

[Pandemonium]

I am wondering where I fit into all of this. I am a social liberal, fiscal and economic conservative and I am a fan of Marx and Keynesian Economics.

[aku chi]

I am wondering where I fit into all of this. I am a social liberal, fiscal and economic conservative and I am a fan of Marx and Keynesian Economics.

I would describe your economic position as a state of contradiction. I assume you refer to a strong preference for government balancing its budget when you mention fiscal conservatism (that's how I've heard the term used). But, as you probably know, Keynesian economic theory proposes that governments liberally increase spending and decrease taxation during times of recession. Fiscal conservatism and Keynesian economics cannot coexist (at least in times of relative recession).

I'm not sure what you mean when you mention economic conservatism (I haven't heard the term before). If you are referring to a classical economic position, this is the position that Marx was adamently against in Das Kapital. He proposed a system that is different from, and inconsistent with, classical economics.

Concerning the original post, I agree that the labels conservative and liberal are confusing and largely misapplied (in the U.S.). I don't think that there are many true Burkean conservatives anymore (anywhere). Semantically, progressive would seem to be a better opposite of conservative but there aren't too many true progressives in American politics. For instance, Republican politicians are more likely to support unrestricted international trade (a liberal policy) whereas Democratic politicians are more likely to propose alternatives, including protectionism (a conservative policy). It's all a big mess. I blame the de facto two-party system. It's almost impossible for a new party to enter American mainstream politics (it hasn't happened since the Republicans replaced the Whigs in the mid-nineteenth century). As such, the two parties are encouraged to change within their party and keep their old labels and perceived ideology to hold onto older voters. This has an apparent tendency to pervert the original meaning of political labels.

[Profit]

I would describe your economic position as a state of contradiction. I assume you refer to a strong preference for government balancing its budget when you mention fiscal conservatism (that's how I've heard the term used). But, as you probably know, Keynesian economic theory proposes that governments liberally increase spending and decrease taxation during times of recession. Fiscal conservatism and Keynesian economics cannot coexist (at least in times of relative recession).

I'm not sure what you mean when you mention economic conservatism (I haven't heard the term before). If you are referring to a classical economic position, this is the position that Marx was adamently against in Das Kapital. He proposed a system that is different from, and inconsistent with, classical economics.

Concerning the original post, I agree that the labels conservative and liberal are confusing and largely misapplied (in the U.S.). I don't think that there are many true Burkean conservatives anymore (anywhere). Semantically, progressive would seem to be a better opposite of conservative but there aren't too many true progressives in American politics. For instance, Republican politicians are more likely to support unrestricted international trade (a liberal policy) whereas Democratic politicians are more likely to propose alternatives, including protectionism (a conservative policy). It's all a big mess. I blame the de facto two-party system. It's almost impossible for a new party to enter American mainstream politics (it hasn't happened since the Republicans replaced the Whigs in the mid-nineteenth century). As such, the two parties are encouraged to change within their party and keep their old labels and perceived ideology to hold onto older voters. This has an apparent tendency to pervert the original meaning of political labels.

Fiscal conservatism and Keynesian economics can coexist. When times are good the government should keep spending, the budget deficit, and the overall expansion of the gov'ts role in the economy to a minimum. Fiscal conservatism during times of economic growth places the gov't in a position to then quickly expand spending and run up a budget deficit when the economy tanks. Otherwise I agree with your take on US politics. I for one am growing a little tired of the two party system.

[eagleseven]

I am wondering where I fit into all of this. I am a social liberal, fiscal and economic conservative and I am a fan of Marx and Keynesian Economics.
You hold cognitively dissonant economic beliefs.

Keynes was diametrically opposed to Marxism, and saw his economics as a anti-Communist alternative to the Austrian Free Market.

How can I adopt a creed which, preferring the mud to the fish, exalts the boorish proletariat above the bourgeois and the intelligentsia who, with whatever faults, are the quality in life and surely carry the seeds of all human advancement?

[themuzicman]

"Conservatism" and "liberalism" are terms relative to a particular culture and political setting. In general, "conservative" means that we apply the lessons of the past to the present circumstance. "Liberal" means that we ignore the past and try to come with something "new" to try to solve the present circumstance.

In the US, Conservatism refers to the principles that founded the US: The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the various institutions that this nation was build upon. At the time of its establishment, the US was very much a liberal idea, but when it became an institution with its own culture and political setting (during the 1800s or so), respecting those traditions became the "conservative" position.

Thus, liberalism is that which seeks to move beyond or alter the foundational principles of the US, because they think that new (new to us, anyway) principles will work better than the old ones.

I am fairly sure that these definitions applied to any cultural/political setting will prove out.

[hubcap]

I consider myself a "classic liberal" in a Jeffersonian sense (sans slavery), but I view "modern liberalism" with great disdain.

[INTJRyan]

"Conservatism" and "liberalism" are terms relative to a particular culture and political setting. In general, "conservative" means that we apply the lessons of the past to the present circumstance. "Liberal" means that we ignore the past and try to come with something "new" to try to solve the present circumstance.

In the US, Conservatism refers to the principles that founded the US: The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the various institutions that this nation was build upon. At the time of its establishment, the US was very much a liberal idea, but when it became an institution with its own culture and political setting (during the 1800s or so), respecting those traditions became the "conservative" position.

Thus, liberalism is that which seeks to move beyond or alter the foundational principles of the US, because they think that new (new to us, anyway) principles will work better than the old ones.

I am fairly sure that these definitions applied to any cultural/political setting will prove out.

I get it. Liberals are out to destroy the foundation of America. Got it. :rolleyes: