Community votes are collected from you and other visitors to Ask500People. Independent votes are collected from visitors to hundreds of other websites around the world.
Sign Up or Login
Sorry, this data is only available to users with an account.
Conservatives have opposed virtually all expansion of Constitutional liberties including abolition of slavery, a woman's right to vote and the failed equal rights amendment. They've fought against anti discrimination, freedom of the press and personal privacy laws. Conservative Tories actively fought against American revolutionaries and conservative Southerners started the Civil War in defense of slavery.. Need I say more?
Conservatives or Liberals both swing back and forth between government control (Authoritarian) and Libertarian points of view. We went from the slightly Libertarian Reagan to a Big Government Bush II to an authoritarian, more Government is the answer to any question, Obama.
Libertarians, whether Conservative or Liberal tend to expand liberties and Authoritarians, whether Conservatives or Liberals, tend to restrict liberties.
So your question can only be answered yes... or no.
Reagan was no more Libertarian than I am. He was pro-Big Business all the way, starting from his first day in office when one of his first act was to strip the head of the FDA of his powers, blocking the banning of aspartame, so that his buddy Rumsfeld, then head of Searle, could get it approved.
He wanted economic liberties, but not more social liberties. So no, he doesn't reflect your values, but he was more Libertarian than any other nationally known Republicans except Ron Paul or Steve Forbes.
No, it wasn't about corporations. It was about capitalism. Since corporations thrive on capitalism, (just as countries do) they benefited. But it wasn't specifically about them.
I understand the link between Big Business and behavior that is bad for the country and/or bad for the individual.
My original point, which I still stand by, is that Republicans tend to push for economic and systemic liberties, while Democrats tend to push for more social liberties. Neither one is more Libertarian than the other.
[1 point]145 days ago by JWBrothersReplyEdited 145 days ago by JWBrothers
Maybe parties suck - but no democratic system has yet managed to function without them. On the other hand dictatorships are run with only one or, maybe, noparties at all.
United States
Conservatives have opposed virtually all expansion of Constitutional liberties including abolition of slavery, a woman's right to vote and the failed equal rights amendment. They've fought against anti discrimination, freedom of the press and personal privacy laws. Conservative Tories actively fought against American revolutionaries and conservative Southerners started the Civil War in defense of slavery.. Need I say more?
They both suck at it.
Conservatives or Liberals both swing back and forth between government control (Authoritarian) and Libertarian points of view. We went from the slightly Libertarian Reagan to a Big Government Bush II to an authoritarian, more Government is the answer to any question, Obama.
Libertarians, whether Conservative or Liberal tend to expand liberties and Authoritarians, whether Conservatives or Liberals, tend to restrict liberties.
So your question can only be answered yes... or no.
Reagan was no more Libertarian than I am. He was pro-Big Business all the way, starting from his first day in office when one of his first act was to strip the head of the FDA of his powers, blocking the banning of aspartame, so that his buddy Rumsfeld, then head of Searle, could get it approved.
He wanted economic liberties, but not more social liberties. So no, he doesn't reflect your values, but he was more Libertarian than any other nationally known Republicans except Ron Paul or Steve Forbes.
You do get that I am not particularly Libertarian? Reagan wanted liberties only for big corporations. That is not Libertarian in ANY sense.
No, it wasn't about corporations. It was about capitalism. Since corporations thrive on capitalism, (just as countries do) they benefited. But it wasn't specifically about them.
And since the days of Eisenhower's military-industrial complex, that has meant big corporations.
I understand the link between Big Business and behavior that is bad for the country and/or bad for the individual.
My original point, which I still stand by, is that Republicans tend to push for economic and systemic liberties, while Democrats tend to push for more social liberties. Neither one is more Libertarian than the other.
And MY point is that Republicans push for economic liberties--but only for the super=rich and big corporations.
Neither. Only we the people. All parties suck.
Maybe parties suck - but no democratic system has yet managed to function without them. On the other hand dictatorships are run with only one or, maybe, noparties at all.
You are right about that. It is all just a big mess no matter what way it goes with any party.
In Europe conservatives often want less state control and socialists or social democrats (liberal means something different here) want more.