Conservatism and Liberalism

[Universe Prince]

I'm intrigued with where the conservatism and liberalism threads seem to have gone. But I'm seeing something that I think perhaps needs its own thread.

Michael Medved, in his column about the core of conservatism, said of conservatives: "Though we’re obviously imperfect, and (like all human beings) often fail to do the right thing, we try to draw lines between the beneficial and the dysfunctional, between productive and destructive." And: "In policy as well as personal life, we seek to differentiate between good and bad behavior, and we want all of society (not just government) to encourage the good and discourage the bad." He also said conservatives "insist on making distinctions, giving the individual broad latitude to choose, and then recognizing that choices must carry consequences." Couldn't all of that be said of liberals as well? Isn't that why we have generally bipartisan support for things like the war on drugs? Isn't encouraging the good, discouraging the bad and recognizing that choices carry consequences why liberals tend to favor bans on smoking? For that matter, seems to me similar things could be said about libertarians.

In my initial post in the "Core of Conservatism?" thread, I said, "Medved seems to be saying the core of conservatism is a desire for moralistic and authoritarian control of society." A statement with which Michael Tee, who (I feel safe in saying) is a socialist liberal, agreed. I'm not clear on whether the conservative folks who replied agree or disagree. In any case, later on, in a response to something Xavier said, Amianthus suggested that, "the core of progressism [sic] is CONTROL. They want to tell everyone else what to do, when to do it, and take their money away from them to pay for it."

So is what we have here a 'coin' of desire for control of society with liberalism and conservatism each being a side? Please don't take this as a reproachful accusation, because I don't mean it that way. I realize that conservatives and liberals are really broad groups of people with many differing opinions in both camps. But isn't there at least an underlying principle of control for an intended greater good within conservatism and liberalism? If you think there is not, please make your case. If there is not, then how do you reconcile that with the restrictive and/or regulatory laws generally associated with your side of the political spectrum, conservative or liberal?

As I said before: Any answers are welcome. I am not out to attack anyone. I will not argue with your answers or criticize them in any way. Possibly I might ask for clarification of a statement, but I will not be sarcastic or antagonistic about it. I just want to see how people address this issue.

[domer]

How's this for control: kiss my ass.

[Universe Prince]

Would you care to elaborate on that, Domer?

[Xavier_Onassis]

How's this for control: kiss my ass.
----------------------------------------------------
A rhetorical question, obviously.

Running any society will always involve some degree of  control, even if it's just putting up traffic lights anand signs up.

 
OSHA is perportedly attempting to benefit the average consumer when it sets standards for safety and efficiency.

[Amianthus]

Both sides of the political spectrum (liberals and conservatives) are seeking control of various things. This is represented in our society by both major political parties attempting to limit the rights of citizens, only choosing to take them on in a slightly different order.

[larry]

AMI, I agree that both parties have committed Gross abuse of the public over the history of this country. The domestic business plan of socialism between 1914 and 1974 was a plan with many deceptions. The capitalist domestic business plan after 1974 is also a plan of many deceptions. I do not believe either plan had the interest of the general public as its first priority. The state has always put the government's interest ahead of the public interest and anyone who contested the policies, were silenced in one way or another. The business plan of today has evolved into a system of economic entrapment. It is a win win situation for bankers and the public shoulder all he risk. Inflation has been the key aliment of the government's domestic business plan since 1974. Today, most Americans do not own anything, other than a contract of debt. Loaning money to people who cannot afford to pay is a sucker's game. Its all assets for the lenders and total liabilities for the barrowers. The people of America have become slaves to debt and the government has become dictatorial.

[Amianthus]

Today, most Americans do not own anything, other than a contract of debt. Loaning money to people who cannot afford to pay is a sucker's game. Its all assets for the lenders and total liabilities for the barrowers. The people of America have become slaves to debt and the government has become dictatorial.

That's an incorrect statement; lots of Americans own lots of stuff. Most Americans own more crap than they need.

However, saving is not encouraged in this country. This is due to a combination of "we'll take care of you when you're old" (social security) and "we're gonna tax everything you earn, so it doesn't matter if you save." The former can be fixed by privatizing, the later by a VAT of some sort replacing the income tax.

[larry]

AMI, Yes Americans own a lot of things, but let them lose their job and its all gone in a flash. Is that not the game of Monopoly? Off course people never really own land, it can be taken at the government's demand and without just reason or compensation. Ownership is contingent upon one's ability to pay the taxes and privilege of use fees. There is an aspect of servitude built into the business plan and all Americans know poverty is a threat to everyone. I agree taxation is a key element of social and economic control.

[Amianthus]

AMI, Yes Americans own a lot of things, but let them lose their job and its all gone in a flash.

Because they are not saving. The changes I suggested would encourage savings, which would allow more Americans to survive longer after losing their jobs.

[Plane]

It would be nice if we could mange to be conservative about applying controll and liberal about tolerateing libertys .

In any case that is intrusive on liberty ,there ought to be a close examination on the subject of whether the increase of controll caues a benefit worthy o the consequent loss of liberty, and everyone should be interested.