I need some help defining American politics

[Sylvia727]

American politics is basically polarized into two different camps. There is the conservative mindset, concerned with the preservation of tradition and American values, most commonly but not exclusively associated with the Republican party. Then there is the liberal mindset, concerned with individuals' rights and liberties, most commonly but not exclusively associated with the Democratic party.

I've decided to outline the basics of both ideologies. I'm trying to create a list of the issues, and a value-neutral three or four word summary of each ideology's position. For example: Abortion. Conservative: pro-life, liberal: pro-choice. What I need your help on is thinking of more issues facing the American public and rewording any positions I've listed with awkward syntax or an inaccurate summary of the camp's position. Remember, I'm trying for value-neutral descriptions. It's not only possible, but also likely, that I've phrased positions I don't agree with in value-negative ways, simply because I don't see the other's point of view.

Please do not debate the actual issues listed.

• Liberal / Conservative
• -
• Pro-choice / Pro-life
• Gun control / For 2nd Amendment rights
• Against the death penalty / For the death penalty
• Universal health care / Private medical care
• For gay marriage / Against gay marriage
• For 1st Amendment rights / Censorship of obscenity and pornography
• Separation of church and state / America is a Christian nation
• Large social programs / Low taxes
• Public education / Choice in education
• Affirmative action, equal outcomes / Equal opportunity
• Protection of environment / Dominion over environment
• Globalism / Patriotism
• Rehabilitation of criminals / Punishment of criminals
• Accept immigrants already here / Tighten immigration
• Regulation of business practices / Limited government
• For legalization of recreational drugs / Against legalization of recreational drugs
• Decriminalization of prostitution / Against prostitution
• Comprehensive sex ed / No sex ed or abstinence only sex ed
• Living Constitution / Strict interpretation of Constitution
• Pacifism / Support for strong military
• Gender equality / Gender roles
• Morality independent of religion / Religion as main source of morality
• Alternative family structures / Traditional family structures

[Amethyst Hunter]

The problem with pinning this down is that I don't think it's any easy thing, to say the least. The cultural mindset is always changing - for instance, a decade ago you couldn't talk openly about gay people getting married and we had "don't ask don't tell", now it's almost like a regular subject on the news.

Also, a lot of the descriptions tend to imply a values-negative/positive meaning. Some of these can't be helped; some of them are deliberately posed to elicit a prescribed reaction. Take the obvious one abortion, for example. Those against it call themselves "pro-life" which would imply that anyone who supports a woman's right to choose it is therefore "bad" and supports what in their eyes is murder (we shall leave that one up to individual determination, and we won't even get into the many "pro-life" groups that are so extremist as to want to deny birth control and sex ed as well).

Most people, by and large, fall somewhere in the middle of the two big ideological camps, and are a mix of semi-liberal-semi-conservative. For example, using gay marriage, there is overall more support for "civil unions with benefits," as opposed to defining a union between gay people as "marriage" (and yes, religion does play a factor in that one because of most people's cultural upbringing).

In short: American politics is a slippery bastard by its very nature, and I can't say as I blame anyone outside the US for going "...bwhuhhhthefuck?" at us.

[AFPheonix]

I rather like to think of liberalism and conservatism in 2 different camps: fiscal liberalism or conservatism, and social liberalism and conservatism.

Not all those who wish government was wiser with money are against abortion or other liberal social issues and vice-versa.

[Boozy]

Not all those who wish government was wiser with money are against abortion or other liberal social issues and vice-versa.

No, but the Democrats have posted a much better economic record in the past 50 years than the Republicans. It is a lingering misconception that the Republicans are the party of fiscal responsibility. There is nothing in the platforms of either party that prevents them from spending and saving money wisely.

The major difference in economic policy between the Republicans and the Democrats is that the former cut taxes at the top, and the latter cut taxes (and provide programs) at the bottom. I won't argue either point, but one of these policies is far more likely than the other to stimulate real economic growth.

[Arcade Man D]

Off-topic but...


ARGH! Please pick a different blue! That's unreadable on the default skin for Fratching!

[Sylvia727]

ARGH! Please pick a different blue! That's unreadable on the default skin for Fratching!

I have the default skin and it looks readable to me. The bright blue burned my eyes. If it's really that bad, I'll put them both back to grey. I debated whether or not to include colors when I posted it, but I decided that blue and red might help folks to understand which side was which.

AFPheonix, I forgot to mention in my first post that I was aiming for social policies, not fiscal policies and hopefully not authoritarian/libertarian policies. Though it can be hard to separate either.

Amethyst Hunter, the slippery nature of the subject is exactly why I'm trying to pin it down. Very few people are exclusively one or the other, but by outlining what each camp tends to believe, I can get a better grasp of the situation. This list actually got started while discussing the current election. I identified my ideology as independent-leaning-towards-x, and my friend identified me as independent-leaning-towards-y. I tried to find a list of the issues so I could say, "I'm x here, y here, both here, and neither here." Unfortunately, the lists I found were either incomplete or hopelessly biased.

And yes, most subjects tend to be phrased value-positive, like abortion. Everyone favors choices, right? And how can life be bad? The main thing I'm trying to avoid with this list is prejudicial phrasing.

[AFPheonix]

No, but the Democrats have posted a much better economic record in the past 50 years than the Republicans. It is a lingering misconception that the Republicans are the party of fiscal responsibility. There is nothing in the platforms of either party that prevents them from spending and saving money wisely.

The major difference in economic policy between the Republicans and the Democrats is that the former cut taxes at the top, and the latter cut taxes (and provide programs) at the bottom. I won't argue either point, but one of these policies is far more likely than the other to stimulate real economic growth.

I don't disagree with you. The Republican party has been hijacked something fierce by social conservatives.
However, I made no mention of any party in my initial post

[daleduke17]

No, but the Democrats have posted a much better economic record in the past 50 years than the Republicans. It is a lingering misconception that the Republicans are the party of fiscal responsibility. There is nothing in the platforms of either party that prevents them from spending and saving money wisely.

Um...you might want to tell the State of Illinois that. Our Democratic Governor has put this state into one of the biggest holes it has ever seen. The Republican one from the early 1990s (Jim Edgar) actually brought good stuff to Illinois (only to have it pissed away by a fellow Republican - George Ryan). Blagojevich (current) has only furthered Ryan's idiocy. Just like Clinton brought a lot of good things to the nation only to have Bush piss it away.

In reality, we're (The US) are pretty fucked until there is honest change in the command of this nation.

[protege]

I don't know about the rest of the state, but Pittsburgh's last mayor (Murphy) got the city into some serious shit a few years back. From Wikipedia:

"As mayor, he initiated a public-partnership strategy that leveraged approximately $4.5 billion in economic development in Pittsburgh. Against overwhelming public opposition, he secured $1 billion in funding for the development of Heinz Field, PNC Park, and a new convention center that was the largest certified green building in the United States. As mayor, he oversaw the transformation of more than 1,000 acres of blighted, abandoned industrial land into new commercial, residential, retail and public uses. He also lured, using public subsidies, both Lazarus and Lord's & Taylor department stores to the downtown section of the city. Both stores were monumental failures in Pittsburgh, each closing within a few years. In addition, he oversaw the development of more than 25 miles of new riverfront trails and urban green space. Initiatives such as these drove the city to the brink of bankruptcy, resulting in it being declared a "distressed" city by the state. To help recoup some of the city's losses during his tenure, Murphy made the controversial decision in 2003 to lay off a number of city employees, including police officers. Some of these jobs were later saved by dramatically increasing the city's parking tax, making it the largest such tax in the country."

That last bit is *exactly* why downtown development simply doesn't happen. Nobody wants to deal with the high cost of parking downtown--it's simply easier to hit any of the suburban malls. Parking is free, and we have more stores to choose from.

What annoys many people here, is that the Democrats have been in charge since the 1930s, yet can't figure out what they're doing wrong. Tax people high enough, and they'll leave...taking the corporations and businesses with them. As for Murphy, he was later investigated for some allegedly questionable contracts with the city firefighters' union.

I hope nobody thinks I'm slamming the Democrats. You get *any* party in charge too long, and they start working for their own interests...instead of those of the people who put them into office. Even so, we've had some great mayors: Richard Caliguiri, David L Lawrence, and Bob O'Connor. I never met the last one, but I do know he was well-liked and respected. Hell, they all were.

[Boozy]

However, I made no mention of any party in my initial post

Touche.

I think I read more into your post than was there because I've been rather sensitive to this issue lately. Canada is approaching an election and this appears to be a pretty common misconception about our Conservative and Liberal parties.

Sylvia's list appears to be more weighted towards social policies, so I guess it would be a moot point anyway.

[anriana]

[*]Separation of church and state / America is a Christian nation

The social conservatives care about more than just prayer in school. There's also the 10 commandments on government property, swearing people in on the Bible (and not the Koran!), etc, so that position should be more general.

[Arcade Man D]

I have the default skin and it looks readable to me. The bright blue burned my eyes. If it's really that bad, I'll put them both back to grey. I debated whether or not to include colors when I posted it, but I decided that blue and red might help folks to understand which side was which.

Well, not totally unreadable. I think I just have issues with dark on dark contrast. Guess I didn't totally escape the fact that everyone in my family has eye problems.

[Sylvia727]

anriana- changed! Thank you.

Arcade Man D- I think I'll leave it colored for now. Sorry.

[Arcade Man D]

Huh, guess it was a lighting issue, too. Because when I read it at home instead of on break at work, it's fine.

>.>
<.<