Do you consider yourself a Republican?
An internet dictionary defines Republican as 1. a person who favors a republican form of government. 2. a member of the Republican party.
Now, do you fall under definition one or definition two?
Another question – is the United States a Democracy or a Constitutional Republic?
A Democracy is 1. government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system. 2. a state having such a form of government: The United States and Canada are democracies. 3. a state of society characterized by formal equality of rights and privileges. 4. political or social equality; democratic spirit. 5. the common people of a community as distinguished from any privileged class; the common people with respect to their political power.
A Constitutional Republic is defined as a state where the head of state and other officials are elected as representatives of the people, and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government's power over citizens. In a constitutional republic, executive, legislative, and judicial powers are separated into distinct branches and the will of the majority of the population is tempered by protections for individual rights so that no individual or group has absolute power. The fact that a constitution exists that limits the government's power makes the state constitutional. That the head(s) of state and other officials are chosen by election, rather than inheriting their positions, and that their decisions are subject to judicial review makes a state republican.
The answer to this question is a Constitutional Republic and definition 2 for a Democracy is absolutely wrong!
Next question – are you a Republican or a conservative? The same internet dictionary defines conservative as 1. disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change. 2. a person who is conservative in principles, actions, habits, etc. 3. a supporter of conservative political policies.
Most people, when discussing the two major political parties in the United States, tend to lump Democrats as liberal and Republicans as conservative. As I have already defined conservative, what then is a liberal? The internet dictionary defines liberal as 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs. 2. (often initial capital letter ) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform. 3. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties. 4. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers. 5. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies. 6. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc. 7. a person of liberal principles or views, esp. in politics or religion.
Can you be a conservative Democrat or a liberal Republican? The answer is yes. The key is adherence to the Constitution.
So I repeat, are you a Republican or a Conservative. If you state you are a conservative, do you fully support the definition given above? Or do you consider yourself a Republican because you belong to that particular party? I ask these questions because I want people to start thinking where they stand and what they believe. Because your stance and beliefs determine what kind of leader you are and who you select as a leader. I am a conservative and I want conservatives leading the Republican Party.
It is my opinion that the Republican Party – starting with local grassroots organizations and leading to the President of the United States – are Republicans because they belong to the party. It is also my belief that the Republican Party is bereft of leaders. Conservatives do not lack in ideas. Our ideas begin with the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution. How many Republican leaders today expound on these two great documents?I want you to think about this while I list the four main concerns that future conservative leaders need to address in the forthcoming years. These concerns are terrorism, immigration, energy, and .taxes. I will leave now to let you think about these concerns and how our ‘leaders’ are handling them.
3 comments:
Although I don't identify completely with either "liberal" or "conservative" political ideology, I find the literal definition of each term has inherently more positive connotations for "liberal."
Take the apolitical definitions of conservative:
1. disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.
And then the apolitical definitions of liberal:
1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
3. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
4. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
5. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
6. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
If you take politics completely out of equation - that is, we stop equating "conservative" with Republican and "liberal" with Democrat (or green party, etc.), forget all the pundits whom we agree or disagree with, and focus merely on the way in which they are defined, who really wants to be identified as conservative?
The definition of conservative as mentioned above suggests unconditional resistance to change. However, the very nature of the universe is dynamic, so this seems in defiance of natural law and logic. If we were preserving existing conditions, here's a few things which we might still have:
1. Feudalism
2. Slavery
3. Marriage to 13 year old girls
And so on. There are many things about humans and their behavior that have evolved from "traditional" ways of thinking in to what we generally consider to be more refined and "enlightened" in modern times.
The definitions of liberal on the other hand appear to have much more positive connotations. Progress is nearly universally viewed as a good thing. Someone claiming to obstruct progress would have to be a very stubborn fool indeed. "Reform" on the other hand can mean any number of things, but usually "reform" has the connotation of cleaning up, or otherwise improving its target. While reform could also simply represent change which could be regressive, "reform" is almost always used in a positive context, e.g. "reformed" criminals who are now upstanding citizens.
"Maximum individual freedom possible" seems like a good idea, right? Perhaps not when taken to an extreme, but I think in general people universally agree they want their individual liberties.
Another definition mentions favoring representational forms of government (Republic, Democracy) as opposed to monarchy or other totalitarian forms of government. I don't think anyone in an industrialized "enlightened" nation in the world would argue for a return to monarchy either.
So irrespective of their political connotations I find the definition of liberal much more accommodating than conservative. Of course, once you put politics back in the equation, they take on such added meaning beyond the simple definition that you can pretty much eradicate those definitions entirely.
It was conservative Republicans that wanted to end slavery. It was liberal Democrats that wanted to keep and extend slavery. It was liberal Democrats that founded the KKK - the terrorist arm of the Democrat Party. It was the conservative Republicans who wanted to disband the KKK and arrest them as criminals. It was conservative Republicans that wanted to outlaw lynching, treating it as a federal crime. It was liberal Democrats who oppossed and stopped this. It was conservative Republicans who pushed for ratification of the 14th and 15th amendments and sent troops to liberal Democrat southern states to enforce these two amendments. It was liberal Democrats who fought against Reconstruction and eventually ended Reconstruction in the 1870s, creating Jim Crow laws and segregation. It was the conservative Republicans who had an integrated federal government leading up to Woodrow Wilson. It was the liberal Democrat Woodrow Wilson who implemented segregation in the federal government. I could go on.
I asked in my original post whether someone can be a conservative Democrat or a liberal Republican. The answer is yes. How? Think about it and give me an answer. I also suggest you read the book Liberal Facism.
My comments were never an indictment of the Republican or Democratic parties. Just merely remarking that the definition of the two words as stated in your post seemed to hold inherently more positive connotations for "liberal" than "conservative," which I found interesting and ironic in many ways.
I am well aware of the past Republican efforts to end slavery, as well as past Democratic racism. Robert Byrd, one of the most tenured Democratic senators, was admittedly a member of the KKK. In spite of these facts, most of the "black vote" in the last few decades has gone to the Democrats who are now viewed as the "civil rights" party. Perhaps it is because these days statistically most of those who state race has a factor in voting and claim they are unable to vote for a black man identify themselves as Republican voters or independents.
But none of that was relevant to my comment. I would suggest responding contextually to a narrative rather than replying with irrelevant extrapolation.
As to your question "[can someone] be a conservative Democrat or a liberal Republican" the answer is of course "yes" for several reasons. The most compelling reason is that they are merely labels and as such can be applied in a myriad of different ways. Party affiliation is similar in the sense that one can be in a particular party while perhaps disagreeing with many of the party's tenets. The most common usage of "conservative Democrat" or "liberal Republican" is a matter of relativism. Bill Clinton was considered a "conservative Democrat" for some of his stances on trade, crime, etc. John McCain has past been considered a "liberal Republican" (or some Republicans just call him a straight Democrat) for his positions on immigration, taxes, etc. Most of these he has since flip-flopped on in an attempt to appeal to the conservative Republican base. Barack Obama will similarly have to move to the center if he wants to have a chance in the general election.
Within each party there is a spectrum of left-right, the two extremes of each party generally being crazy extremist zealots, and the more sensible people being close to the middle.
Post a Comment