Lol I so get FE now.

I'd challenge one person on this forum to define either liberal or conservative without Google and without bringing up religion, gay marriage, abortion, or gun control. I think that even the most politically minded among us would struggle to do so.

 

For me, I feel that I'm a conservative because I'm slow to change. I prefer an "as little as possible" approach to all things political. So if we're talking welfare, I'm very much pro welfare, but I'm pro welfare in as little of an amount as needed to keep society afloat. I'm pro abortion, but only to the extent that excessive childbirth doesn't overburden the lower class.

 

I think that rather than defining a single view on a single topic, liberal and conservative are terms that define a measurement on a single topic. A conservative wants to spend the least for the most output. A liberal wants to aggressively attack social issues with government interference and I find government to be the least efficient of entities in the free market.

 

I think that as long as we define each other in a way that defies logic and confuses we're doomed to continually chase political rainbows that don't exist. I think that these terms have become an excuse for ignorance. We don't need to engage in political discourse-we can simply throw a term down. Increase taxes? DAMNED LIBERAL. How about increasing taxes by the smallest amount possible to get the job done? Seems conservative enough to me. Reagan was a big spender, but he did it in the amounts necessary to do the job. You can't just constrict your political abilities in order to satisfy a term.