Compare and contrast political liberalism with political conservatism in the first half of the nineteenth cent
442205
political conservatism in the early nineteen hundreds had just embraced a radical change of political theory, one nation conservatism, this was the idea that the nation that is the UK was split in to two nations rich poor, and the nobility had an obligation to look after the poor, this was the idea of noblesse oblige or paternalism. \nLiberalism on the other hand was being to embrace the full diversity of what its ideas would become, the political theory of modern liberalism was newly formulated and governed that no longer would the drunk in the gutter deserve all that he got, more the idea that the community had a place in society and that place was to provide the safety net for which would become the welfare state.\ninconclusion conservative thinkers were coming to the idea that the rich were to look after the poor, the liberals were embracing the idea of taxation to support the entirety and in comparison to each other they both began a time of more compassionate caring politics.
905646
everything\n\ngenerally, liberal stances vs. conservative stances\n\nthe liberal ideal:\n\nBroadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights. It seeks a society characterized by freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on power, especially of government and religion, the rule of law, free public education, the free exchange of ideas, a market economy that supports relatively free private enterprise, and a transparent system of government in which the rights of all citizens are protected.[2] In modern society, liberals favor a liberal democracy with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law and an equal opportunity to succeed.[3]\n\nthe republican ideal:\n\nClassical or institutional conservatism - Opposition to rapid change in governmental and societal institutions. This kind of conservatism is anti-ideological insofar as it emphasizes process (slow change) over product (any particular form of government). To the classical conservative, whether one arrives at a right- or left-leaning government is less important than whether change is effected through rule of law rather than through revolution and sudden innovation.
548138
If you used the dictionary definition of a liberal, most conservatives would want to be liberals, or would think they already are liberals:\n\n"marked by generosity and openhandedness, broad-minded, tolerant, bountiful, munificent" and so forth.  All except the part "lacking moral restraint, licentious" applies equally to conservatives.\n\nGood question, because I don't think a liberal defines himself the way a conservative defines a liberal.  And vice versa.
58379
Conservative libertarian.
1058470
Liberals identify with Jesus's compassion and the way he was always there to help the poor, the sick, and those without a political voice.  Liberals often claim conservatives don't care about the poor, but in reality conservatives simply believe the poor are better helped through private charities rather than through government programs which are often impersonal and wasteful.
1043536
You can make the same argument about the Conservatives being stuck in the 50's.  Each faction (Cons and Libs) are stereotyped into a certain ideology that is compared to a way of thinking or political movement of a past era.  I consider myself a moderate Republican.  As such, I have as much in common with the far left as I do with the far right.  To me, both factions are "behing the times".  We live in a rapidly changing world and Liberals need to realize, just as Conservatives do, that their views and ideology are no longer embraced by the majority of the country. \n\nAnd just to add a comment, Conservatives want your money just as much as Liberals...the difference is that Liberals want to give it to the poor and/or less fortunate via government programs wheras Conservatives want to give it to the poor and/or less fortunate via religious institutions.  Same goal, just different ways of doing it.
540420
Since when have we had a standard, not to mention two??\n\nI thought the idea of Liberalism was "anything goes - as long as the gov-ment pays".\n\nGee - I've got to re-think this politics stuff!
1130377
Reform, Orthodox, and Conservative.
648777
the conservative party
342798
Modern liberal theory can be best understood by reading Elizabeth Anderson's posts referred to below.  It is solidly grounded in capitalism, it is highly critical of central planning of every aspect of economic life, but it is far more intellectually sound than modern libertarian and conservative economic theory, which has an almost fundamentalist mindset when it comes to free-markets and taxation.  One may be right in accusing the extreme left-wing in American politics of flirting with profoundly anti-capitalistic sentiments, but one would be a fool to pretend that modern liberal theory is anti-capitalist.  If you wish to attack modern liberal theory, start by reading up on it.  There is a reason why the academic world is not dominated by libertarians and conservatives, and it has to do more with the relative value of their ideas--which have not done quite so well in the free marketplace of intellectual inquiry--and less to do with inherent bias in the academic system.  One way to learn about both liberalism and conservatism is to read Rawls, Nozick, Hayek (whom I actually admire quite a bit), Sen, Dworkin, etc.  And once you have read the careful and intellectually stimulating discussions between these people, it becomes incredibly silly to suggest that modern liberal theory believes in socialism.
214486
Veeery generaly speaking, the Left (liberal) and Right (conservative) of politics came out of the French Revolution.\n\nAt that time, the Left was more concerned with laws that protect people's rights, and the conservatives are more concerned with laws that protect property.  \n\nFrom this, the traditional Liberal and Conservatives have arisen.  No one politican or person exemplifies what the TRUE definition of the words are, but issue by issue, the sides of politics have been created by these factions.\n\nIf you ask me, the terms liberal and conservative are meaningless, because they can't capture the entire persons views, and a person who describes themselves as a dem, repub, liberal or conservative is doing an injustice to the political process.\n\nAll politicians agree that its not about sides, its about issues.  Not about teams, its about debate and progress.
956633
Classical liberal thought
1044697
Classical liberalism in my mind is more focused on keeping the government off our backs and out of our wallets.  A classical liberal would not want the government saying who could marry or who could not - or interfering with what substances we could ingest.  A CL would encourage freedom of movement for immigrants an open door policy more or less. BUT they would strenuously oppose government paying for the support of immigrants.  In fact - they'd do away with public education if they could and give the saved tax dollars back to the earners and let them choose how and where to educate the kids.\n\nConservatives also anti-tax and anti-big government.  (Clearly Bush has not been a good conservative.)  But conservatives want a ban constitutional ban on gay marriage, want to restrict a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy etc etc.  So they are willing to use government to coerce their social agenda.  A classical liberal would just want the individual to choose.\n\nI can see from the other posts the a majority of people don't know the difference between the term "Classical Liberal" and "Liberal".  Haha.  No wonder we can not move the political debate to anything more high brow than Rush Limbaugh.
614886
I think it's that the opposite of liberal is conservative.  Conservatives favor the ways and institutions of the past, and would like to revert to them.  And many republicans are conservatives.  Their ideal is therefor the polar opposite of liberals.  And no, I don't think there's anything wrong with liberals, both keeping an open mind and respecting the past seem like good ideas to me.  That's why I couldn't be a member of the press.  I make too much sense and am too respectful of other peoples opinions.
793342
Liberal, in a sense means free, therefore; liberals are those in government who believe more in states rights and less in a  central government. The lines today are skewed and there is no longer an extreme difference between a liberal and a republican. There are liberal republicans and conservative republicans, and just as well there are liberal democrats and conservative democrats. The difference you should be looking for is between liberals and conservatives not liberals and republicans. Some may argue though, and those who argue are truly conservative republicans. In essence the conservative issues are pro life as opposed to pro choice, centralized government as opposed to states rights, opposition to gay marriage and basically any view to an issue that adheres to the way things have been done in the past, or in other words, views that are opposed to change. Lliberal views are just the opposite, those that welcome change and leave more choice in the direction of the country to the people.
713607
I'm conservative.  I had an ecclectic educational mix of private and public schooling, followed by private and State college.  \n\nI observed that liberalism wasn't economically feasible, and didn't factor in human nature.  I studied world history and thought our form of government was the best.\n\nSomething made us different from every other nation, and I thought it was worth trying to preserve.
770415
You are all over the place with this one, son.  You'll be hard pressed to find a marxist conservative (the two are on opposite sides of the spectrum) and liberal is more or less between the two and doesn't really fully agree with either side.  Then you want this nutjob to be in the center; somebody has been listening to too much Rush Limbaugh, or Al Franken--I'm not sure which.