Originally posted by: Arnie.d
So generally speaking, what I would consider liberal you consider conservative?
Originally posted by: Stinky-Dinkins
No, Reagan was considered a Conservative in the US.
Liberals typically support drastic increases in spending associated with government social programs (such as welfare) which give way to higher taxes. They’ve typically spent less on the military and tend to support more diplomatic approaches to resolving international conflicts. Conservatives favor less government intervention and a stauncher stance on the preservation of personal liberty (however, issues such as abortion and gay marriage fall into the shades of gray separating the opposing sides of this notion.) Conservatives are typically both financially and socially conservative and have thus been slow on "righting" (or have perpetuated ) social wrongs (segregation, civil rights infractions, etc.) On the other side of the ridiculous political coin, while they have supported and changed appalling social practices (integrating the Southern social infrastructure, sending the Jim Crow Laws packing, doing away with slavery, etc.) Liberals have typically demonstrated an inability to differentiate between "Change" and "Progress." They have, in recent times, drastically overcompensated. Social programs like welfare have become bloated and far too easy to abuse, affirmative action has in a sense re-legalized racial discrimination, etc.
It gets confusing when you throw in the two Parties. Republicans are typically considered "Conservative" these days, but our current President has spent record amounts on government programs and hasn't really done anything special to protect vital personal liberties (those on the left will say legislation such as the Patriot Act have done completely the opposite and have irreparably damaged the rights of the American citizenry, those on the right will tell you in special circumstances like wartime such infractions on personal liberty are necessary.) I would say Bush is anything but a true Conservative (some would disagree.)
Lincoln, the most famous Republican, was wildly socially progressive (something today that is almost entirely associated with the Democrats) during his tenure (abolishing slavery, suspending Habeas Corpus, not "punishing" the Confederacy after the Civil War, etc.)
During of the first half of the 20th century (and slightly beyond) white Southern Democrats (sometimes called Dixiecrats) were both Democrats and extremely conservative. Later, they completely shifted over to the Republican Party (look at Strom Thurmond’s tenure in the Senate for a nice, encapsulated look at the shift of the Part lines during that period.)
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
Is this "definition" of a liberal generally the same in the US?
Is this "definition" of a liberal generally the same in the US?
No, Reagan was considered a Conservative in the US.
Liberals typically support drastic increases in spending associated with government social programs (such as welfare) which give way to higher taxes. They’ve typically spent less on the military and tend to support more diplomatic approaches to resolving international conflicts. Conservatives favor less government intervention and a stauncher stance on the preservation of personal liberty (however, issues such as abortion and gay marriage fall into the shades of gray separating the opposing sides of this notion.) Conservatives are typically both financially and socially conservative and have thus been slow on "righting" (or have perpetuated ) social wrongs (segregation, civil rights infractions, etc.) On the other side of the ridiculous political coin, while they have supported and changed appalling social practices (integrating the Southern social infrastructure, sending the Jim Crow Laws packing, doing away with slavery, etc.) Liberals have typically demonstrated an inability to differentiate between "Change" and "Progress." They have, in recent times, drastically overcompensated. Social programs like welfare have become bloated and far too easy to abuse, affirmative action has in a sense re-legalized racial discrimination, etc.
It gets confusing when you throw in the two Parties. Republicans are typically considered "Conservative" these days, but our current President has spent record amounts on government programs and hasn't really done anything special to protect vital personal liberties (those on the left will say legislation such as the Patriot Act have done completely the opposite and have irreparably damaged the rights of the American citizenry, those on the right will tell you in special circumstances like wartime such infractions on personal liberty are necessary.) I would say Bush is anything but a true Conservative (some would disagree.)
Lincoln, the most famous Republican, was wildly socially progressive (something today that is almost entirely associated with the Democrats) during his tenure (abolishing slavery, suspending Habeas Corpus, not "punishing" the Confederacy after the Civil War, etc.)
During of the first half of the 20th century (and slightly beyond) white Southern Democrats (sometimes called Dixiecrats) were both Democrats and extremely conservative. Later, they completely shifted over to the Republican Party (look at Strom Thurmond’s tenure in the Senate for a nice, encapsulated look at the shift of the Part lines during that period.)
So generally speaking, what I would consider liberal you consider conservative?
Based on what you wrote, that sounds about right.... but I really have no idea what the political atmosphere is in the Netherlands. I'd say the safest answer is the two affiliations (Conservative, Liberal) are far too different and defined by the unique local political atmosheres of the two countries to really be comparable.