Which is worse: socially liberal economic cons. or socially conservative economic progressives?

[miscsoc]

Post below about Norquist got me thinking.

I'd say libertarians but interested in your view.

To put it another way, which is more practically dangerous to progressive ends in general?

[ColesCountyDem]

1. I've never understood why liberalism and having a sharp pencil were incompatible. n/t

[miscsoc]

5. should clarify re: "economic conservatism"

I don't mean fiscal responsibility as such, but being virulently anti-welfare, indifferent to the poor etc.

[ColesCountyDem]

21. As Emily Litella from SNL used to say, "Never mind".

:P

[Ken Burch]

8. Any liberal or radical program should have very careful cost-accounting

As the great Wisconsin Senator William Proxmire taught us all in the 1970's with his "Golden Fleece Award".

But this needs to be done without taking a "we know your kind" attitude towards the poor and disabled, which too many "sharp pencil" types tend to do.

Liberalism or radicalism needs really good accountants, not green eye-shaded misers.

[ColesCountyDem]

20. Total agreement. n/t

[Ken Burch]

2. Not sure, but I will say this:

When "libertarians" make an accommodation with the GOP, and especially when this accommodation leads them into power, tend to badly compromise their "libertarianism"(if, by "badly compromise", we mean "abandon three-fourths of it").

They abandon much of the "personal liberty" aspect of the libertarian philosophy(ACTUAL libertarians opposed any discrimination against the LGBT community and are adamantly pro-choice)

They give up on some of the libertarian constraints on abuse of government power against the individual in the public sphere(ACTUAL libertarians oppose the death penalty, holding to Jefferson's views on the matter, and are reluctant to let police have unrestricted rights to treat criminal suspects precisely as they wish)

And they don't even think about the libertarian position on foreign policy(which favors a very small defense budget and a non-interventionist policy towards other nations).

All the concern themselves with in power(as, say, part of a Republican administration)is the rights of corporations.

Those not in power tend to have "economic royalist" views on what business should be allowed to do to people, and to be as uninterested in checking corporate power as they are with restricting the power and size of government.

In addition, a fair amount of them are arrogant "self-made woman or man" types who think their relative economic success proves their innatesuperiority as human beings.

This is why some people call libertarians "anarchists with hot tubs".

[KonaKane]

3. Social conservatism is more alarming to me.

Because it goes more to the make-up and mores of our society and the state of our constitutional rights. Economies will go up and down, but avoiding living in the New Dark Ages is a premium for me.

[ironrooster]

10. Spare me your bumpersticker philosophy.

Have you ever heard of Oscar Romero or Dorothy Day?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%93scar_Romero

Dorothy Day (November 8, 1897 – November 29, 1980) was an American journalist, social activist, and devout Catholic convert; she advocated the Catholic economic theory of Distributism. She was also considered to be an Anarchist,<2><3> and did not hesitate to use the term.<4> In the 1930s, Day worked closely with fellow activist Peter Maurin to establish the Catholic Worker movement, a nonviolent, pacifist movement that continues to combine direct aid for the poor and homeless with nonviolent direct action on their behalf.

[KonaKane]

17. If you had bothered to look at my sig graphic,

and noticed the bespectacled gentleman second from the right, you would not have asked me if I have heard of Bishop Romero.

If you had bothered to give a respectful response instead of infantile, predigested snark, you would not be dismissed as you are now.

[Ken Burch]

24. They were Catholics. I'm not sure they were actually "social conservatives"

It's not clear that either obsessed about abortion or gays to the degree that modern "social conservatives" do.

[ironrooster]

28. The point is that religion and progressivism can mix

Contrary to the bumpersticker message

[KonaKane]

30. Thats the point of my sig graphic. I am countering the claim

with the pictures of the people on both sides of it. Try to use your head instead of going for the attack on first impulse.

[ironrooster]

32. OK, at second glance I see it. My bad!

[Ken Burch]

31. religion and progressivism can indeed mix.

The question we were dealing with in this forum, however, was more the question of "religion" that was based primarily on shaming the individual about his personal failings rather than religion based on expecting those in power to act morally.

For much of the past 2,000 years(and I say this as a person who identifies more or less as Christian)the "religion" we had in the "Christian world" was almost exclusively the former rather than the latter. Indeed, religion based on shaming the individual about minor flaws and minor individual misdeeds was acting in the service of reinforcing the power of whoever was the elite of the day.

(You undoubtably know this, but I'm putting this out there mainly to reinforce what I'm saying to others).

[ironrooster]

4. What exactly do you mean by socially conservative?

[miscsoc]

7. I mean, socially repressive really.

I could have phrased this better, but I basically mean the package of things popularly considered "socially conservative" in popular culture (i.e. discrimination against gays, prohibition of drugs, anti-abortion stuff etc.)

[ironrooster]

12. prohibition of ALL drugs? Or just prohibition of pot?

I'm not sure legalizing METH is wise - does that make me a social conservative?

[miscsoc]

16. slightly, but not in a bad way really

actually, the drug thing is a little different, I semi-retract that part of the definition

[BrklynLiberal]

6. Was Wm F.Buckley Jr a social liberal and and economic conservative?

I guess the answer depends on how one defines economic cons and socially conservative.

There are "Conservatives" out there today that might make Barry Goldwater seem middle-of-the-road.

EDIT: I do not believe Norquist joined that group for any other reason but to get more power for himself.

[miscsoc]

9. I think he was, at least re: drugs and stuff

I'm not sure what his positions were re: sexuality etc.

Def. an economic conservative in the usual sense tho

[Ken Burch]

11. He had this weird proposal that anyone who was HIV positive

should be legally required to have their status tattooed on their buttocks.

[ironrooster]

13. It was for his own safety!

[TheKentuckian]

14. Reaganites, free traders, and supply siders are worse because

they always sell out the other principles for the money, deregulation, and favors for the powerful. ALWAYS.

When the currency must flow then nothing can stand in the way and everything is for sale.

Always follow the money. Follow the money and you'll uncover the real character.

[JI7]

23. social conservatives are bigots and want to deny basic rights to people who are different in any way

from them.

[TheKentuckian]

27. I didn't say they weren't. I was given a choice and gave reasons for the choice

Pure triage of poor options.

[bemildred]

15. I like socially liberal economically democratic progressives myself.

Anything less than that seems lame to me.

[Taitertots]

18. Socially conservative is much worse

We could all be free and live in peace with below peak production.
I'd rather not trade oppression for increased GDP.

[SocialistLez]

29. I'd rather not trade oppression for increased GDP.

Hmmmm....

Is poverty not a form of oppression as well?

[Taitertots]

33. Compared to the systemic bigotry which is social conservatism, it is preferable

As "SocialistLez" I'd figure you would find the anti-homosexual bigotry of social conservatism especially offensive. Essentially, I'd rather live free at peace with my community and be poor than be wealthy and force systemic bigotry onto people.

The increased GDP from economic conservatism would only go to further concentrated wealth. GDP would increase, but it would never decrease poverty. So I guess you are right, it would be trading one type of oppression for a different type of oppression. However, I'd prefer economic oppression to systemic bigotry.

[Curmudgeoness]

19. What would a socially con. economic pro. be?

Does that mean do nothing to help anyone but yourself? No help for others, and lower taxes, etc. for them. How can you be a progressive then?

[miscsoc]

22. I suppose, welfare is ok but fuck gays, atheists, women who want an abortion, etc.

[nomorenomore08]

26. I think Jim Wallis might be said to fit the "economically progressive, socially conservative" model.

As far as I know, he's opposed to abortion and same-sex marriage, but advocates government programs for the poor.

[immune]

25. Labels don't matter

they/we are all owned and operated by Wall Street and the fed res, right down to the bone.

[entanglement]

34. Which is worse: AIDS or cancer?

Which one is wetter, water or oil?
etc

[provis99]

35. socially liberal economic conservatives are worse.

Social conservatism merely affects my freedoms. Economic conservatism affects my survival.