History shows us that liberalism eventually prevails. Conservatives fought against freeing the slaves, against women's right to vote, and against civil rights.. to name only a few. In every instance they used their churches and their Bibles to spew their hatred. Recently their spewing has become volcanic. In the end, however, I believe that true justice will prevail.. and you can thank liberals for that.

I consider myself a social liberal but fiscal conservative. I am against the war but heavily support capitalism. I believe most liberals prefer to live in America than in any other country in the world, but some are undoubtingly anti-american. The extreme liberals are ones I can't stand. They complain incessantly, and will keep finding something to whine about. They complain about problems that have already been fixed, don't need to be fixed, or can't be fixed. For example liberals complain about massive pollution produced by automobiles. However, todays cars produce just 1% of the emissions of cars produced 30 years ago. Liberals complain about racism. Yet studies show that blacks with the same level of education and job credentials actually have a higher pay than whites. Most liberals hate capitalism and the free market. And I think that's the problem - they understand little about economics and it's benefit to society.

Liberalism: The same as communism, only it's advocates aren't nearly as intelligent.

Liberalism is like a cancer, kill it before it grows. liberalism equals communism. Move to Cuba you anti American pieces of sh!t.

Liberalism is the only thing standing between most of us and the utter domination of naked greed, willful, Taliban-like ignorance and perpetual war.

Over the past 30 years the American people have been conned into thinking 'liberal' is a dirty word, the Saturday Night Live alum says. Because of liberal reforms, we enjoy things like desegregation, child labor laws, environmental protection, seat belts and birth control. These are liberal reforms that we as a contemporary culture brag about, take for granted and enjoy, so how is it that liberalism is a dirty word? --Al Franken

Webster's Dictionary says: A political philosphy advocating personal freedom for the individual, democratic forms of government, gradual reforms in political and social institutions, etc. That sounds pretty good to me. Conservatives talk about less government, but it's less government only when it applies to those with money and power. It doesn't mean less government when it comes to women controlling their own bodies, declaring war on a country that is not a direct threat to the US, trying to change the constitution to oppress gays, enforcing the death penalty, imprisoning Arab-Americans whether guilty or not. Less government only applies when it comes to guns laws to reduce the killing and kill-mentality prevalent in the US, school programs, mental health programs, gauranteed health care, social services, etc. Certainly there a few exceptions to everything, and I hope the conservative reader will not simply pick out the exceptions to discount this assessment. (By the way, if most conservatives were like John McCain and a few others who use their minds and not their jerking-knees to react, I'd feel much differently on the subject.)

The thought that Liberals could be condemned as being dictators when the republican party has just initiated the Patriot act taking away your freedom of speach is amazing. I support liberal views of helping the lower man so he can support the higher ups. Its only logical.

Liberals are insane.

People who slag liberalism normally don't know what it means, or have a FOX News notion of the word. Liberalism is derivied from the word LIBERTY. Liberalism is all about freedom and rights. It nicely combines an ideal social goal with personal liberty.

Nostalgia ain't what it used to be.And freedom of choice(with the exception of school vouchers...).

I like liberalism. It means combining right-wing economics with left-wing social attitudes. The best of both worlds.

Most people who rate liberalism have absolutely no clue what it means. Start with this: it involves using REASON rather than DOGMA. Unfortunately, dogma is about the only thing the brain-damaged knuckledraggers who have left recent comments here can understand.

I am rating Liberalism as I have experienced...not the philosphopy definition provided. I simply can't believe that anyone could define Liberalism in that way. In fact, Liberalism as it is practiced is nearly opposite of the definition. Most liberals believe 1) Not in progress, but in stifling progress by inhiting entrenprenurial spirit, 2) Not in the inherent goodness of the human race...if they did they would not insist on over-legislating and regulating to control all of us inherently good people. 3) Not in the autonomy of the individual, rather in the need for an all-powerful Government controlling all of us because we are, in their view, incapable of thinking for ourselves, and 4) they are only interested in protecting the civil liberties of those whom they agree with.

Before examining my five star rating it is important to note I am rating new liberalism here, not the classical definition. Classical liberalism regards private property and personal freedom as inalienable concepts (advocated by Locke, Pettit etc). However contemporary liberalism (advocated by Keynes, Hobson and Rawls etc) similarly dislikes the state obstructing personal freedom but is commonly known to desire moderation of private property and the free markets as not to damage the prospect of equal opportunity. The theory is that if property owners become too powerful they can coerce individuals into working for poorer conditions then that individuals ability may merit, furthermore influence of extremely powerful individuals can have adverse effects on democracy and economic decision making becomes more self-centred and autocratic. Hence government intervention is needed to assure people of all classes have an equal opportunity to succeed and are provided with an environment free of the possibility of exploitation. Hence new liberalism is defined not only by personal freedom but a need for equal opportunity as well. If the role of the state is to protect liberty I see no problem with the welfare statism and emphasis on public works, services and redistrubutionary taxation which became so prevalent in the early twentieth century (and remain a centrepiece of modern day liberal ideology to this day) and allowed the working classes to have a genuine stake in their future as well as the ability to reap the benefits of a working economy at last. To underline the defining logic for modern day liberalism I quote D.G. Ritchie be it observed that arguments used against government action, where the government is entirely or mainly in the hands of a ruling class or caste, exercising wisely or unwisely a paternal or grandmotherly authority such arguments lose their force just in proportion as the government becomes more and more genuinely the government of the people by the people themselves

My dad and I don't see eye to eye on a lot of things, but he is right about one thing: MOST LIBERALS ARE HYPOCRITES! They speak out against prejudice but are often exceedingly prejudice themselves (i.e. they say that all Republican WASPS are racist, e.t.c.). They claim to be for free speech but want to censor all those who disagree with them. They claim to hold a monopoly on compassion yet they support killing innocent unborn babies and deny poor parents the right to send children to the school of their choice. They throw stones at conservatives for being elitist yet their positions on numerous issues are undeniably elitist (e.g. support for abortion and excessive gun control and opposition to school vouchers and term limits, e.t.c.). They claim to be pro-choice but yet they oppose choice 95% of the time, they only support choice when it comes to abortion, and even then its not really a choice (what choice does the unborn child have in the matter?). They claim that Republicans are racist, even though all of the political figures in the late 1950s and early 1960s who tried to keep black children out of colleges and universities were Democrats (Wallace, Faubus, O'Connor, Maddux) and it was the Dems who very recently had a former member of the Ku Klux Klan as their Senate Leader for 12 years (Robert Byrd of West Virginia - 1977-1989). Not to mention the fact that a higher percentage of Republicans voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Bill than Democrats did. And all 3 times in which income taxes were cut significantly in the U.S. (including at the top) - the 1920s under Harding and Coolidge, the 1960s under JFK, and the 1980s under Reagan, the economy flourished. Rush Limbaugh is right, evidence does indeed refute liberalism.

I don't agree a hundred percent with it, but to those who would call us authoritarians, I ask you to take a good, long look at yourselves. Who believes in legislating morality? And by this I mean not just the decent measures such as rating movies, restricting youth's access to pornography and violence and lewdness in movies, or age-of-consent laws. I'm talking about the people who think they can outlaw homosexuality and control what people do in their bedrooms. I'm generally not in favor of homosexuality, but how are you going to enforce a ban on private, consensual gay male sex (not pedophiles raping boys in bathrooms) like Texas had tried to do until that law was struck down recently? Who are generally the loudest demanders of book and movie censorship, and seem to believe that fictional stories are far more dangerous than actual weapons? Who are snapping up screeds from an extremely unprincipled trollop named Anne Coulter who actually does state that "the Democratic Party needs to go away", and who said John Walker Lindh should be executed not so much for his crimes against this country but to send a message to liberals that they can be executed too. (A perfect example of that supposedly superior conservative intellectual discourse, eh?) And then there are some clerics who think we should return to Old Testament-style Judaic law and execute adulterers. So again, who are the real authoritarians? Oh, and to those who would call liberals communists, well, the original Communists, the Soviet Russians, weren't exactly anything-goes hedonists. Long hair and jeans were banned there until the early '70s. Rock music was heavily repressed, including those evil Jesus-hating Beatles. The Eastern Bloc in the '80s was said to more resemble Europe before World War II, the time American conservatives say was an era of good old solid moral fiber which we ought to return to. Even the American Communist Party actually approved the censorship of certain comic books in the early '50s! So as far as "legislating morality", conservatives have a bit more in common with Communists than they'd care to admit. Oh, and from what I've read of Jesus and the original saints of Christianity, they were more like inner-city social workers than your average alpha male conservative social Darwinist (pun intended). I feel American Liberalism is based on trying to do what one can to eliminate the worst elements of society. Unfortunately, I would feel that too many Democrats these days have put too much energy in trying to defend disgusting types such as Larry Flynt in the name of free speech, and need to focus on our real problems today; the Bush administration's desire to cut anti-pollution measures, worker's comp and job security, and the conservative's continued dogma of worship of the dollar and bottom line and social Darwinism (despite what they say about the actual Charles Darwin).

Liberals, in a perfect world, care about the future and making the world a better place for all its inhabitants. However, many "liberals" like to put on a big, hypocritical show but when it comes to making sacrifices, they wiggle out of it. For example, most liberals say they believe in equality, but how many of them would actually give their job to a minority or allow a family from the projects to move into their subdivision? Most liberals believe in a welfare state, but how many of them are willing to give up 50-60% of their paychecks to support it? The "liberals" of the 1960's became the corporate whores of the 1990's...so much for ideals, huh?

An ideology of change, peace and progression. Liberalism is the ideology of civil rights, human rights and environmental conservation. It is the ideology for free-thinkers.

A just society is founded on compassion for fellow man. I think that, though imperfect, liberalism is despratley needed in these dark times. Compassionate conservative? Ask the 6% unemployed, veterans losing benefits, Medicare privatizers, and the "lucky duckies" accourding to WSJ earning 10K/year. Feeling the compassion yet?

Nearly worse than nazism.

In short liberlism is an ideology where accountability and responsibility, social and economic, are taken away from the individual. Liberals like to call it "freedom," but the only freedom that they really care about is freedom from guilt or obligation. Take for instance welfare. A person can recieve money for the achievement of simply being in need. Not to mention the fact that the money comes from somewhere, and that somewhere is from a tax payer's pocket. Welfare = freedom from obligation. Then there are anti-war protesters who have no trouble citing free speech for themselves, but will not put anything on the line to secure this freedom for others. This after generations have fought, and died, so that today's soldier can be heckled by these mobs. The belief that nothing is worth fighting for = freedom from historic obligation as a free people, with a tinge of freedom from guilt by promoting the message of "peace." Then there is the entire liberal concept of "peace." Peace to a liberal is the absense of war. Peace, in real life terms, is human freedom. We fought a war against Germany and Japan sixty years ago, but we will never fight one again. That is because we left free market democracies in the wake of destruction. Now both countries are models of freedom and success. The same will hopefully prove true for Iraq if it is not sabotaged by the liberal definition of peace (aka appeasement and hubris). Speaking of real world versus liberal "theories" of it, there is economic policy. Liberals support heavy government regulation (of more than just the economy) and a distrust of the free market. One needs only briefly examine the effects of planned and free markets on the real world to see the glaring inadequecy of liberal thinking. Countries can literally be sorted by economic success based on the freedom of their markets with the top nations as free and the bottom ones as planned. This free market paradigm even shifts the way that success is gauged. In America a "poor" person has an apartment, a car, a cell phone, a TV, and gets more calories per day than Louie XIV. In China this "poor" person would be even more prosperous than can hardly be imagined. Where as a poor person there would be lucky to eat something rotten once a day. Not to mention the fact that this person has no rights as a human being. Liberals not only leech upon the freedoms of their societies, but they also look to abridge the freedoms of others, and not just abroad. They believe in "free speech," but think that people should be able to sue when their feelings are hurt. They believe in "free choice" when it means killing an unborn baby, but not when it means owning a firearm. Basically, liberalism is an ideology based a collection of failed or failing social experiments that have no basis in reality, which brings us back to the original point. Imposing failed systems on others is also known as freedom from obligation; the obligation of the government to provide for the common welfare.

In many way liberals seem to be going over to communism. Everything is based on equality instead of self achievement/improvment. They claim conservatives are racist because, we believe in achieving instead of being handed something for being a minority. The truth is most conservatives want people to EARN what they get, we simply don't care about someones race or sex, we want the person who is the best. We believe that everyone should have a fair oppurtunity to succeed. Liberals are so concerned about what every individual wants, and the only "solution" to that is anarchy. We want what is best for everyone in society. Liberals are simply a group of people with ideas so fragmented god couldn't make them work.

The Liberals of today are also known as Communists. They desire to place every aspect of man's life under strict governmental control, including all individual rights. Liberals also try to spin their theories in the name of "helping others", but every single thing they stand for strips rights from one individual or another. Any liberal political theory can be blown to smithereens just by taking their "cause" to it's logical conclusion. Here's an easy one: "Cars are bad for the environment. They kill trees and people as well with all that pollution. We need more government regulkations on car exhaust." The next time you hear something like that, ask the orator to explain why, if car exhaust is so bad for the environment, is there grass growing right up to the side of busy highways? How can trees, bushes and grass grow on medians, with cars rushing by 24 hours a day? Their answer will either be a blank stare or a nonsense explanation about how grass is somehow not part of the ecosystem they are concerned about, yadda yadda. Anyway, you get the drift. Liberals = clever Communists = stupid and easily defeated either way.

Technically Liberalism is a strong belief in progress, reforms, and freedom of minds (all good, right?), but in actuality liberalism as it is in politics today is nothing more than the love of such things as huge powerful federal government, weak military support, queer-loving, pay the poor simply for being poor, a major lack of morality, they hate capital punishyment yet fight to support abortion, etc. And for this I give it one undeserved star.

I was one of those kids who had to attend public school in New York City in the 60's, when the phenomenon known as "white guilt" ran rampant. I was always a nice quiet kid, but I was white, and fair game for the black kids to beat up. The teachers were terrified,yet continued to spew their liberal dogma all the same. This is when our city's schools started to decline. We had a militant black neighbor who would not speak to us for the sole reason we were white. My dad tried on many occasions to be friendly, to no avail. Had any of these situations been reversed, he'd be labeled a racist. There have always been politicians who covet the immigrant vote, otherwise they would never have been elected. Immigrants during the late nineteeth and early twentieth century were willing to adapt the customs and morals of their new country. I believe in immigration. I think we need a quota, although it is percieved to be dirty word, I feel that taking in the world's non productive people is part of our problem. The politicians, teachers, and intelligencia in the last 40 years have been manipulating us into their socially engineered view of the world. I am sure some of them actually believe in a utopian ideal, in which people all love each other, don't eat meat, eschew guns, etc. Most of the above mentioned people KNOW what the real world is like. Their goal is to continue our current ruinous course. Their children do NOT go to public schools, they live in expensive neighborhoods, they don't have to deal with what the vanishing middle class in this city must deal with. Any middle class person, regardless of race or religion, who is resposible,is productive, pays taxes, and is just trying to have a half way descent life, feels this way! The media portrays us as evil or stupid. This is just one of the ways the liberal "elite" incite the "victims" of this country to view us as the enemy. And it has worked very well so far...

Liberalism is one of the better political ideologies. Progress, civil rights - these are all good things and if the conservatives ruled the day, not much social progress would have been made. Europe prides itself on its liberal attitudes. look at countries such as Holland or Switzerland or Sweeden. These are without a doubt some of the best places on earth to live. In some European countries Marijuana has been decriminalized which has helped keep the teenagers away from harder drugs because they are not buying it from shady drug dealer types who will sell anything. Prostitution is also legal and this can help protect the woemen from rapes and assault. We have to learn from our mistakes and move on, not dwell in the past and keep things the same. Evolution didn't stop with us growing thumbs you know.

"A political theory founded on the natural goodness of humans and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties, government by law with the consent of the governed, and protection from arbitrary authority." Now, as with my rating on Conservatism, I am rating the political ideal of liberalism- not the Democratic Party or the radical liberal beliefs which shape the crazy political scene today. Let us examine the first part of the definition: "... founded on the natural goodness of humans and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties...". I don't see how anyone could disagree with this belief. Any belief favoring civil and political liberties stands for what the United States is all about. If liberalism is founded on the autonomy, or independence of the individual, then it is interested in protecting what the United States is all about. "...government by law with the consent of the governed, and protection from arbitrary authority." This is definately another representation of protecting what this country is all about- protecting the citizens from arbitrary (dictatorial) government, and a government by law with the consent of the governed. It seems to be that liberalism in its official definition is synonomous with freedom, with the ideals upon which this nation was founded.

Whether rightly or wrongly I will use this term to define the Center-wing / Liberal-democracy. Its views are Freedom of the individual, Free-trade, Democracy, a Free Press, More than one Palamentry House, Freedom of Information, Privitization, a more just legal system, fedralism, and globalisation. Liberals are opossed to dictatorships, usually opposed to Socialism and to a less extent because of less diffrences to Nationlism. I do not agree with Privitization (short term gain) and globilisation (has its problems). It uses Laissez-faire Keynesian economics. Liberal Philosophers were J Locke, Adam Smith & J S Mill.others include Jesus and Ghandi. PS: Left and Right also claim to belive in progress.

Before you start you should realize that this is not the classical 18th century political philosophy of the Liberalism of Adam Smith, Locke and Hume. That definition is inoperative in this discussion. The philosophy under consideration is American Liberalism. Liberalism is a borrowed and deceitful title for socialist in the American social order that tends to be Conservative, Capitalist, Religious and a Republic and where the left is compelled to compete for votes. The next new name is Progressive, which is just as deceitful since they are nothing but retrograde totalitarians. Liberalism in the United States is not any of the silly, grandiloquent and sanctimonious nonsense that the left pins on itself but a political order based on venal calculation: We liberals take money from the productive in our society based on their supposed desire for “justice and equity” and divert it to ourselves and people who will now vote for us and our policies because they benefit directly from our largess. An perennial interesting comparison of the charitable habits of Conservatives and Liberals has consistently found that conservatives are more generous with their own money to charities than liberals even attempt to be. The fact that the pantheon of liberal demigods includes such crass calculators of the price of the public will as LBJ, FDR and Clinton never seems to detract from the false high opinion of themselves that these Liberal/Socialist have. We are instructed by our Judeo-Christian ethic to be our brother’s keeper not to compel with the threat of force disinterested third parties to be our bother’s keeper. Liberal don’t love anyone what they love is the ability to feel good about themselves on the cheap. The environment, the poor, sexual deviants and race are positions that enhance their power by removing responsibly from the individual and vesting it in the state and the ethos of the state. When they talk about “ecological” Armageddon they always postulate it in the framework of reducing the number people and economic freedoms. The most telling position in the Environmentalist/liberal theory of the environment is that we have to eliminate 5 billion people to achieve sustainable growth. Isn’t that always the way with the Left, Somebody always has to die or suffer in the Liberal/Socialist calculation of a just society. They are merely propagator of misery, degradation and sloth. In their moral universe it is always somebody else fault why they fail. They believe in being free of responsibility for their behavior and entitled to take from the responsible whatever they lack.

Conservatives seek to take from the poor and give to the rich. They seek to put nothing in front of profits; sticking to the status quo because progress, to them, is a danger. Liberals seek to create a broader middle-class and truly help those in need; give them a hand up instead of a couple of non sequitors. They seek to establish certain inalienable rights for every person. They seek to protect our environment not at the expense of people (Saying liberals put the environment before people is utterly untrue, and really makes one sound uninformed), but for the good of people. There are two very important misconceptions that people have: 1.) That liberals hate christians. Liberals don't hate anyone, but they will defend against the christain majority imposing itself on others or effecting the way our government is run. 2.) Abortion is right, thats the way it is, and I wish that the conservatives would stop whining to make themselves feel righteous. But it's not even an issue of liberalism, so don't confuse them, many liberals may support abortion, but that does not mean its a tenet of liberalism. If you don't understand these things its probably because you are the result of the terrible public education system, kept under-funded by the conservatives.

Well said, Solenoid and several others- I am sure some liberals will choke on this, because it is true! My original rating of 5 reflected my agreement w. a comment AGAINST liberalism- see, we conservatives make mistakes, too, but they don't screw up the economy, or set killers free, AND we often admit our errors and correct them! :-) Friends don't let friends vote liberal- w/o at least trying to get them to see the error of their ways. Final thought: it is COMPASSIONATE (and conservative) to be one of the millions of Americans who want to save the lives of unborn children rather than abort (as in brutally kill) them. There are no unwanted children, as the long waiting lists at adoption agencies prove.

Liberalism is great. plain and simple. in it's purity it is. i think close-minded fools , who had Liberalism confused w/celebrity political endorsements..have it all wrong. true liberals see every side true liberals defend their country when it's right and justified. true liberals are free thinkers w/o blind faith in anything true liberals dont squash others freedoms true liberals dont bash religion true liberals dont bash the economy true liberals think forward and not backwards true liberals love the environment, it's animal life, and most it's human population. oh---& SOCIALISM and LIBERALISM arent even in the same ballpark--look up the definitions, you MORONS!!

I think that some things need to be clarified when discussing Liberalism as a political philosophy. Liberalism is not being discussed here in the context of being a liberal Democrat who wants big government. Liberal here is defined as the philosophy that the individuals right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness should takes precedence over that of the communities. It is a very broad generalization. Most Western democracies owe their inspiration to classical liberalism. Movements for representative governments and open markets came from liberalism. What really is the fundamental theme of liberalism relates to the freedom of the individual to develop his talents. Jeremy Bentham, a classical liberal thinker from the 18th Century, defined liberalism and it's role in the community as follows: "The community is a fictitious body, composed of the individual persons who are considered as constituting as it wer its members. The interest of the community then is, what?--the sum of interests of the several members who compose it." The governments role is merely to protect people's rights to own property. We owe the progress of Western Civilization over the past 250 years to Liberalism. It opened up Europe and America to the rest of the world economically and intellectually. That is what liberalism is all about. The only weakness that some philosophers have pointed out (accurately) about Liberalism is the fact that it's too general in nature. How do you define the pursuit of happiness? It could be robbing your next door neighbors of his property. The role of solid natural law here is weak and that could be a problem. It's a good philosophy in the broad sense.

Socialism.

YEs we must be more tolerant and open minded

just call it socialism...

(1.) Liberals are obsessed with race. To them, only a white person can be a racist, and if you disagree with a liberal about anything, regardless of the subject, he will try to make it sound like you have a racial motive. That way, he can intimidate you into not expressing your beliefs openly. Liberals are constantly encouraging division between blacks & whites. They encourage a sense of envy and aggrievement, in order to get votes for themselves. By painting America as a racist nation, they can then paint themselves as missionaries of justice who will set things straight. (2) They are obsessed with money, and can NEVER get enough of our income in taxes. If the worker wants to keep more of his own earnings, they accuse him of "greed." (3) They lie during election season, running on platforms that sound fairly conservative. Then when they win, they immediately swerve to the left. If liberalism were truly best for our nation, they would proudly proclaim themselves liberal up front, instead of trying to hide it from us. (4) They punish achievement. Not only is it hard to earn more money, but you can't even put some in a passbook savings account without the government helping itself to half of the meager interest you earn. (5) They have a deep mistrust of Christians. I attended a convention of the National Education Association once. They identified Christians as a primary enemy of our schools. At the same time, they implied that only liberal Democrats should be elected. Meanwhile, I didn't hear them saying anything about the education of our children. (6) A politician can appeal either to the best that is in us (personal liberty, patriotism, & faith in God) or he/she can appeal to our lower nature. Liberals seek to divide people, encourage ill will, and stifle any discussion among people who disagree with them. I'm not a very young man anymore. I've lived under liberal rule for a long time. My beliefs have been shaped, not by the news media, but by what I've seen and heard from our liberal leaders.

Liberalism is the religon of fools. It is like a cult of people who claim to be against racisim and classism but if you are a low income or poor white family you are shunned by the same people who want to give such large handouts to even moderately good income minorities who put very little back into the system. Liberalism is what America has become. A Nation of people who will backstab you and sell you out to make themselves look like they are the good guys.Anything for a dollar. The new American way. Brought to you by the Liberal Democrats that put this country in the toilet.

Liberalism has no moral compass other than personal emotion. The end result is not as important as looking good and feeling good on the surface. One thing that bothers me most about liberalism is its arrogance. The liberal says, "A lot of people are prejudice but I'm not… A lot of people don't care about the poor but I do" etc. Face it. The average person is not bigoted or uncompassionate - including the average conservative. Liberals just want to think they are an exception to the rule so they can pat themselves on the back and feel good about themselves. Liberalism is destructive. It pretends to care about the poor but supports programs that cause the poor to be dependent on the government. It pretends to be against racism but race remains a central focus of liberalism. The liberal constantly talks about race and stirs up racial tension even where it doesn't exist. If anyone emphasizes skin color it's the liberal. It pits people against each other - men against women, rich against poor, black against white… Liberalism doesn't care about facts as long as what it proposes to believe looks like its supporting someone's "rights." An example would be abortion. Liberalism isn't even concerned about investigating whether or not a fetus is a human life or not. It just wants to feel good about the fact that it supports someone's right to choose. Liberalism is a deceptive ideology. If the devil had a branch of politics it would be liberalism.

Liberalism. Liberals. The Loony Left. Liberalism has it's good points and it's bad points (as do almost all ideologies). While Liberals are Pro-Choice, I would not call them baby killers. I myself am pro-choice, provided it is done as soon as possible, never after the first trimester, and preferrably only in cases of rape, drug users, known physical defects and incest. However, if a woman doesn't wish to have a baby, I am not going to stop her, and I am sure as hell not going TO KILL HER! Explain to me how someone who labels themselves as "Pro-Life" can justify killing mothers or doctors at abortion clinics. That's like a vegan killing a slaughterhouse worker. IT'S JUST INSANE! So there is a good side to liberalism, as I think pro-choice is the right choice. However, Some ideas that liberal have are just so... hypocritical. Profess to love everyone, to treat everyone equal, but still group into like-minded, like-colored, like-religioused, like-nationalized cliques. Heaven forbid they mingle with others. I am sick and tired of talking with people who claim to be liberals, play kissyface with people they meet and then call them some derogatory name (I was just edited by RateItAll for words used here...) behind their back. It seems to me that a good portion of Liberals are just as bigoted as Conservatives, they just try to hide it. Why? I think for most Liberals, it's all about appearrances. They want to seem like the most well-heeled, culturized, I-love-everybody-in-the-world people, and loathe the thought of offending someone. This is worse than being an out-and-out bigot. With an overt bigot, at least you know where you stand. With a covert bigot, you never know. These are people to fear, as you never see it coming. I like the ideals of Liberalism, love all people, help all people. But the overabundance of these P.C. brain-dead drones is a bit annoying. No one wants to offend, everyone is looking to be offended, it's nuts. I mean, do you realize some of the greatest TV shows ever made could not air right now? All In The Family, M*A*S*H*, Good Times, Sanford And Son. And could you imagine if they tried to make "Smokey And The Bandit" or "Blazing Saddles" now? No studio would back the movie. This is a result of Liberalism P.C.ing America. Might as well have T.P.ed America... I see Liberalism much like I see Communism, good in theory, terribly executed

This is good stuff! Traditional liberalism, that which means individual liberties, a strong belief in the inherent goodness of man, and a preservation of the individual all resonate with me. But on the other hand, a strong belief in the inherent goodness of government also strikes me as something that should be warily respected. What is really cool is that we have a system of checks and balances that has been our guide to good government for the past 225 years or so, for better or for worse. I also like liberalism because it is gentle and trusting, and inherently accepting of all opinions and tolerant. It allows for room to grow and tends to put a positive spin on the face of doom-and-gloom, at least in my life experiences. Liberalism is a wonderful thing because it allows me to point out all the blowhards like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity who are, despite their vehement objections to the contrary, classic LIBERALS! To be fair to these two guys (now how many conservatives do you know who are really, truly tolerant?) are really mouthpieces for intolerance and jingoism, and, to this avowed liberal, smacks of anti-Americanism. Liberalism ROCKS! Everyone shold have a healthy dose of liberalism for their breakfast every day! It makes for a great start to everyone's day! And, should they have constipation and need to use the bathroom, just take a dose of conservatism mixed in with a pinch of Limbaugh and a smidgen of Hannity, and everything should run much more smoothly.

These are the most amazing people in the entire world! If you don't believe me, just read some of the posts here. They have actually managed to corner the market on tolerance, humanitarianism, love, happiness, creativity, wisdom and just about every other positive attribute known to man! Oh, yes except that many also tend to put the value of trees and spotted owls above human life and profess to accept all people and faiths while never trying to hide their loathing of Christians and Christianity. I can't blame most of these people though. As the world continues to deteriorate and any sense of right and wrong we may have been able to cling to gives way to relativism and humanism it's getting harder and harder for people growing up in this world to find a firm foundation on which to build a belief system. Liberalism more than likely appeals to so much of our youth because liberals have apparently solved this confusing "belief" dilemma by graciously professing to embrace everything. How simple and worry free! No choice involved; just a lot of self-satisfied cathartic feelings. The world is your oyster and all you need do is claim the parts you want. And look at all the advantages of chucking a sense of right and wrong; if all things are relative then nothing is actually bad or good. You can do exactly as you please and blame the consequences on something or someone else. This philosophy allows for total freedom as no other could - as well as many of the amazing contradictions in society. Stuff like partial birth abortion and murder lawsuits for unborn babies killed in car accidents, disgust for the Nixons and Falwells (conservative idiots) and admiration for the Clintons and Jacksons (liberal idiots), a desire to blame politicians for the deaths of millions - yet no apparent concern for the lives of the unborn, a profession of love for country and yet often times an unwillingness to commit to its security and safety in war time. I am amazed at how many times liberals congratulate themselves as being the only true lovers of peace but are never quite willing to go that extra personal mile to defend that peace. What a grand luxury for these noble pacifists that others have been and still are. I guess it's not that it's bad or good (couldn't be could it?) it may just be that it's not convenient.

Acceptance of ALL people of EVERY race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, etc. Not by any stretch of the imagination discriminatory (Conservative Republicanism). It amazes me how conservatives are for some reason scared of people that look or act different than them or what they want. They accept people that are different, that is the main difference between liberals and conservatives if you were to make a one trait that is contrasted.

Liberals. We are made out to be these awful people who believe in killing babies, Devil-worship, perjury, etc. etc. etc.. But to all those conservatives who sy they are compassionate: am I missing something here? Are you forgetting a man by the name of Ronald Wilson Reagan? Do you truly believe that, as ellajedlicka21 has so often pointed out, the murder of 80 million odd people was a compassionate act? Liberals love homosexuals, blacks, all religions, and several other minorities that conservatives hate. And that is what makes us good people. Conservatives think they are executing the wishes of God, or so some of them say. Has it occured to you that Osama bin Laden and Jerry Falwell also believe they are executing the wishes of God, and it leads them to do terrible things? If you all were really compassionate people, you'd stop trying to stick your blunt pins in liberals' backs and join us in our fight for all of humanity! Long live the liberals!

Liberalism is the ideology that unify creativity, radicalism, freedom, democracy, the rights of the minorities, peace & even federalism! Not bad in one only ideology! To say something general about liberalism: "It's an ideology that always try to give people the absolute highest amount of freedom without taking away other's freedom". That explain why it's so genial & ethically profound. :-)

I don't even know what I'm rating here, because the definition in the corner of this page retains the original spirit of this word (and the sense in which it is still used outside the U.S.), which is closer to libertarianism than anything else. That would get a "5 - Excellent" rating. But modern U.S. liberalism might be redefined in a manner quite different: "A political philosophy based on pandering to interest groups; inciting emotions of victimhood and fear; and denying the autonomy of the individual, the right to property, and protection of civil liberties. Modern liberalism retains a naive view of the efficacy of government programs; it attempts to legislate away any and all problems; and it has a condescending view of ordinary citizens' abilities to cope with their own situations. It is unclear whether modern liberalism's leaders' attitudes are simply misguided, or born from a cynical strategy to acquire public power through demagoguery." That would get a "1 - Terrible" rating, so I guess I'll leave this in the ambiguous middle.