Educate me

[sister moon]

I believe in the freedom to do anything you like so long as it doesn't infringe on anyone else's rights but I don't buy the argument that the free market is the answer to all social ills, so I'm not a Libertarian. I don't believe in legislating morality or giving more money to rich people in the misguided hope that it will "trickle down" so I'm not a Republican. But I don't know if the liberal/progressive label applies either. Can someone define it for me? I used to think I was liberal, but I've seen some things lately that make me wonder...

[DebJ]

1. why do you want a label at all? I'm always fighting being put in

a box myself!! You are an intelligent free-thinking person with a variety of opinions. You are (currently) entitled to that (unless Wubya gets his real desires). Nothing else matters.

[wildeyed]

2. I never know how to define myself either.

I basically believe that government exists to remedy the excesses of the free market.

As a small business owner, I have, in the past, been susceptible to some of the free market rhetoric like competition breeds excellence etc. And, I dunno, it might actually work if they really meant it, but I have seen that they don't really mean to have competition, they just mean that the biggest campaign contributors get the boondoggle. If we really want people to have good schools, power, decent medical care or whatever, it needs to be regulated by the government, otherwise the businesses just cheat and steal all our money. So I guess it is a choice between the liberals wasting some of it, but basically getting services to citizens, or businesses stealing it and citizens getting much less. So there is my cockeyed and probably ill-informed economic theory.

I identify strongly with the populist roots of the democratic party and I care about fairness, so I guess that make me a liberal in the final analysis.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

3. Can someone define it for me?

[Pithlet]

4. What are those things?

That make you wonder, that is. Might help answer your question.

[sister moon]

5. Specifically, and I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers here, but

I don't buy into the idea that certain words/ideas/beliefs should be "verboten" simply because someone finds it/them offensive in some way (I am not advocating name-calling, don't misunderstand me). I have a big problem with the language police and the holier-than-thous that bully other posters here. I have and will continue to defend a poster who is being attacked. I have had my status as a "liberal" questioned by these self-rightous, self-appointed thought police.

[Pithlet]

6. So,

People should be able to say whatever they want, no matter how offensive, and not face the consequences of what they say? Here is where I think you have it wrong. No one wants to to stifle the discourse. At the same time, they don't want to stifle the REACTION to that discourse. If I'm going to use language and terms that I, as an intelligent adult who's been out in the world long enough to know which ones those are, then I should also be prepared to face the criticism. I may have a right to say those things, and people have a right to react to them.

People who complain about the language police want to be able to say whatever they want to, and not have to deal with the criticism. They are stifling discourse, also, are they not? I don't feel a bit sorry for people who use words knowing that the will cause the reaction that they will, and then turn around and whine and complain that they're being stifled when people call them on it.

When threads degenerate into flame wars because of the action and reaction, then they get locked. This board is not a free for all. People on both sides get their posts locked and deleted. There are other boards on the internet that are post as you like. If you can't stand a board that wants intelligent, flame free discourse, and if your liberal principles are so fragile that such a board would dissolve them, then maybe those boards are for you.

[sister moon]

7. Action and Reaction

Exactly what makes some threads interesting, informative, exciting even, to me anyway. You call them flame wars, I call them spirited discussion. Tomato, To-Mah-to. I won't ever alert a moderator unless someone is being threatened. I just don't think someone should be silenced for blowing off a little steam by calling Ann Coulter a b****
(rhymes with witch). It wasn't me either, I simply defended the person who said it.
It's the back and forth, the give and take, the point/counterpoint that I love about discussion boards. I just can't stand it when posters who have every freedom to exit the conversation instead choose to have it shut down by alerting the monitor.
And I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how censoring and intolerance are liberal principles.

[Pithlet]

8. Anyone who knows me here

Will know that I'm all about the back and forth discussion on DU :)

You're defending the person that said it. I'm defending the person that is insulted by it. I think that person has every right to express their feelings on the matter. And, it is entirely possible to have the give and take, even spirited discussion, without it degenerating into insults and name calling. I actually prefer my discourse without it. It's much more interesting and intellectually stimulating. I'm all for spirited discussion.

[sister moon]

11. I think you and I agree more than we disagree

:)

[DrWeird]

9. Don't let other people define what liberal means for you.

I'm a liberal, I haven't got a problem with the word "bitch" in the context it was used, most other liberals don't have a problem with how it was used.

[rot0r_head]

10. You sound an awful lot like me

And if you're itching to label yourself you could split the difference and be a social libertarian and an economic liberal.