Please define the 2007 version of what a "Liberal" is.
I know what a yuppie is. Yuppies are boot lickers and Bush munchers. I get that.
I think that the term "liberal" is misused just as the term "terrorist" is.
In my limited existance, anyone who disagree's with you is simply labeled a "liberal", like it's some sort of insult or the end to any argument, discussion or debate.
It' seems to be a new version of the "N" word that can no longer be spoken.
Thanks.
The terms "left" and "right" in the political sense go back to 1789 in France. When the French Estates-General (États-Généraux) met on May 6, 1789, the Third Estate commoners, who wanted less taxes and government control (i.e., "laissez-faire"), were seated on the left side of King Louis XVI, and the Second Estate nobles and First Estate clergy, who were the conservatives and wanted to maintain the government's power, sat on his right. (Prior to the May 1789 convention of the French Estates-General [the first meeting of which was on May 5, 1789], the last time the Estates-General had met was under King Louis XIII from October 27, 1614 to February 23, 1615.)
Also, "liberal" originally meant what we would call today (at least in the U.S. and Canada) "libertarian," i.e., laissez-faire free market, less taxes, less regulation, and gun ownership by the common people. Thus, in the original sense of the words, someone who wanted no taxes, all drugs to be legal, a free market, and armament of the common people would be a left-wing liberal.
The term "liberal" as it is commonly used today is purely and simply a misnomer meaning the opposite of what it originally meant, as those commonly called "liberals" today are about giving government more power, not in stripping government of power. Those commonly called "liberals" today are in fact *right-wing conservatives* in the original sense of that political term. So also, socialism and communism are exceedingly *right-wing* and *conservative* political philosophies, as they put all power into the hands of government, rather than strip government of power.
Of course, this change in the meaning of liberalism (such that today it means the opposite of what it originally meant) was by no accident. Authentic liberalism represents the only genuine threat to statism (i.e., right-wing conservatism, in the original sense of the term), and due to liberalism's triumphs in gaining the intellectual high-ground during the 19th century, it was necessary for the ruling elite to subvert the liberal agenda if they were to survive. The ruling elite did this by sabotaging the very meaning of the terms "liberalism" and "left-wing"--such that these terms now popularly mean the opposite of what they once did--via bankrolling and promoting self-termed "liberal" court intellectuals who in fact promote the right-wing, conservative agenda, i.e., statism, i.e., collectivism. Thus, in doing this, the ruling elite succeeded in changing the meaning of their oppositional philosophy to a philosophy that supports their empowerment! That is, the ruling elite created another branch of right-wing conservatism, nowadays called by the misnomer "liberalism," so also by the names of socialism and Communism.
For the history on how the "capitalist" (i.e., mercantilist) elite in the West bankrolled Communism (as well as National Socialism), see the below scholarly books by Antony C. Sutton, Ph.D.:
Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, Antony C. Sutton, Ph.D. (New Rochelle, N.Y.: Arlington House Publishers, 1974)
http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/bolshevik_revolution/index.html(Note: Chapter I of the above book refers to a 1911 St. Louis Post-Dispatch cartoon illustration by Robert Minor. This can be viewed here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Robert-Minor-Dee-Lighted-1911.png .)
Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler, Antony C. Sutton, Ph.D. (Suffolk, England: Bloomfield Books, 1976)
http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/index.htmlhttp://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/sutton_wall_street/index.htmlThe Best Enemy Money Can Buy, Antony C. Sutton, Ph.D. (Billings, M.T.: Liberty House Press, 1986)
http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/best_enemy/index.htmlhttp://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/sutton_best_enemy/index.htmlBush, Jr., like all modern U.S. presidents, is simply a puppet of his ruling elite backers. As President Franklin D. Roosevelt noted:
""
The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson--and I am not wholly excepting the Administration of W.W. The country is going through a repetition of Jackson's fight with the Bank of the United States--only on a far bigger and broader basis.
""
(From President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in a letter to Col. Edward Mandell House, November 21, 1933; contained in F.D.R.: His Personal Letters, 1928-1945, edited by Elliott Roosevelt [New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce, 1950], pg. 373.)
Roosevelt in the above letter mentioned President Woodrow Wilson ("W.W."). Below is what Woodrow Wilson himself wrote concerning this same matter:
""
Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.
...
[A]nd we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world--no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.
""
(From Woodrow Wilson, The New Freedom: A Call for the Emancipation of the Generous Energies of a People [New York and Garden City: Doubleday, Page & Company, 1913]
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14811/14811-8.txt .)
For the Marxian Trotskyist background of the neo-conservatives, see the below scholarly speech by Dr. Ron Paul, Republican Congressman from Texas. It gives many references and direct quotes from neo-conservative works, and so it's a valuable resource for further research.
"Neo-Conned!," Hon. Ron Paul of Texas (Republican), In the House of Representatives, July 10, 2003
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr071003.htmhttp://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul110.htmlHere's some choice quotes from David Rockefeller:
"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."--David Rockefeller, Memoirs (Random House, 2002), pg. 405
"One is impressed immediately by the sense of national harmony. ... There is a very real and pervasive dedication to Chairman Mao and Maoist principles. Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community purpose. General social and economic progress is no less impressive. ... The enormous social advances of China have benefitted greatly from the singleness of ideology and purpose. ... The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in history"--David Rockefeller, in his article "From a China Traveler," New York Times, August 10, 1973, pg. 31
For more on the New World Order, in the words of the globalists themselves, see the below page:
"Quotes on the New World Order," State-Terror Archive:
http://stateterror.web1000.com/nwo-quotes.htmlIt's also important to note that among many other Marxist planks that have fully or partially been implemented in the U.S., plank No. 5 of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels's Communist Manifesto is "Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly." (See Manifesto of the Communist Party by Marx and Engels, English edition of 1888
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/61 .)
