The problem with Ron Paul is that he oversimplifies and idealizes small-government conservatism when it's not any closer to the solution than straight-up socialism. I feel like what we need is not a new cardinal direction on the existing political spectrum, but a new dimension. There has to be a better paradigm for analyzing political philosophy than conservative vs. liberal with respect to economics, social programs, and culture. That paradigm has run its course.
Classical liberalism (what is now libertarianism) died out when the market couldn't take care of itself. Conservatism grew back strong again, and now we're hitting the same point with the recent recession. And there go the neoliberals back to their base with the red flag.
I have a feeling we're just going to keep swinging back and forth on this same pendulum until society comes up with a better way of analyzing an unprecedentedly complex and global society as the one we live in now.
while researching, I found some LOL-worthy quotes:
Whether social liberalism is founded upon the philosophy of classical liberalism is a subject of dispute. Scholar Leonard Liggio (a self-described classical liberal) holds that social liberalism does not share the same intellectual foundations as classical liberalism. He says,
Classical liberalism is liberalism, but the current collectivists have captured that designation in the United States. Happily they did not capture it in Europe, and were glad enough to call themselves socialists. But no one in America wants to be called socialist and admit what they are.
Comments 8
Classical liberalism (what is now libertarianism) died out when the market couldn't take care of itself. Conservatism grew back strong again, and now we're hitting the same point with the recent recession. And there go the neoliberals back to their base with the red flag.
I have a feeling we're just going to keep swinging back and forth on this same pendulum until society comes up with a better way of analyzing an unprecedentedly complex and global society as the one we live in now.
Reply
and i think "re-distribution of wealth" is a lot more like socialism than just a smaller government...
Reply
Whether social liberalism is founded upon the philosophy of classical liberalism is a subject of dispute. Scholar Leonard Liggio (a self-described classical liberal) holds that social liberalism does not share the same intellectual foundations as classical liberalism. He says,
Classical liberalism is liberalism, but the current collectivists have captured that designation in the United States. Happily they did not capture it in Europe, and were glad enough to call themselves socialists. But no one in America wants to be called socialist and admit what they are.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment