+Confuzzled Tomato There was still quite a bit of bias, but it was rather more neutral than it could have been, towards both sides of the left/right divide. I wish he actually bothered addressing the authoritarian/libertarian divide as well, instead of continuing to push the "left right political line" concept further.

+Kain Yusanagi yea me too. Most young people (like me) don't really understand the economic difference between left and right (for example: who's fault is the recession in 2008), but it's lot easier to understand the difference between authoritarianism and libertarianism.

Exactly what I was about to comment. It's actually a nice breath of fresh air.

+Confuzzled Tomato I disagree, I think it was to a certain degree biased towards conservative, but that may be because i'm from Norway, and the most right-wing politicians here are barely right enough to be compared to American liberals.

MerkRampage Confuzzled Tomato you think this video was close to being unbiased? What a joke. Please get some education

Right?

TheRenownedReviewer our focus is seriously misguided see become a true Craigest and you too shall get to he big issues in life.

Cloning is against my political ideology. All clones are created equal!

Liberals should be rounded up and shot in the head.

@@leekenyon5137 Whilst I am not a liberal, I do not think they should be killed for being liberal.

According to statistics and demographics they are. It, however, remains true that the Israeli government is strongly conservative, but again is not America.

@@Thor.Jorgensen What does Israel have to do with American Jews?!!

I don't know what that means but I like how it sounds

@@sheena_. Do you mean other than the fact that right-wing conservatives and Israeli Jews, alike, like to call American Jews "Fake Jews" or "antisemitic" because of their tendency to lean toward the liberal left in regards to American conservatives' unconditional and unwavering support of Israels' right-wing, fundamentalist government?

You mean milkshake. Beer is sinful.

Becuase people like drama and propaganda more than actual compromises and forward thinking

Cuz both liberalism and conservatism are trash, socialism ftw

@@brauljo No😂

@@brauljo it doesnt work😂

roni Mitchell Capitalism doesn’t work 😂😉💦👌👋👍🤙🙈😅🧠🤷‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤯🥳🤣

when I saw the word craigist, my mind jumped to craigslist

Craigists are often confused with Craigslistists

+NiLowther Craigslisters, maybe?

+Lyndon Rainey this is the only comment of any sense in this war of the word roses. all hail the craign! punch an eagle now!

+Flywheel Shyster Bernie Sanders aint got shit on Craig! #FeelMyFist

The video was super biased.

Shiv Spotz-Parihar I’m really not seeing any bias

@@ohyeahyeah3064 he just wants to say that to start a war in the comments

Kade Daivis i know the comments are made for people to discuss the video But I have seen I ton of comments saying that this video is biased and no reasoning Or even what side it’s biased too

@Kade Daivis I'm not saying having arguments is bad I'm just saying that some people just start arguments for no reason but just to piss people off

That's sad to hear because kids are such open minds that teachers will take advantage and brainwash them for you. It might be a liberal teacher or conservative. For example, I would definitely take advantage. Think of the saying, if you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything.

​@ng da you don't need to bring in your political views to teach right from wrong, though these concepts might be rooted in and/or correlate with political views. I believe, that kids should be trained in formal logic and critical thinking and be exposed to as much philosophy, literature and history as possible. That will make them capable of synthesising their own political, economical, social and moral views.

I admire that highly. Still provide an unbiased perspective on politics religion on society etc. so that they may come to a conclusion when they’re able to comprehend the world around them. Educating them would help them understand I believe and by creating an environment of communication as you suggest would allow for that to be nurtured and further develop.

Not me, the only reason I can see for having kids is for them to help bring to fruition my manifesto instead of it just being me, alone, scribbling it on to a cave wall with a piece of charcoal.

No, my way of thinking is logical so I want my kids to be logical thinkers as well therefore they will most likely follow my political views. It will make for less stressful holiday dinner when they get older

Crash Course is a beautiful thing.

Daniel .DeRuyter Yeah I actually liked this one, I was expecting it to be like most videos where it’s really obviously biased but this was quite factual and tried to be fair to both sides and not have a bias when explaining it, I actually liked quite well how he explained my ideology, and that is extremely rare from most sources claiming to be unbiased.

love it

In terms of the whole fact-thing, I'm quite annoyed by the comment about liberalism and progressivism. I understand the head-itchingly stupid, ideologically illiterate definitions of liberalism and conservatism because it's meant to be about american politics. But considering that "progressive" is probably a more historically accurate label than "liberal" (If nothing else, at least it actually means the opposite of conservatism), so the comment about liberals re-branding as progressives is kinda strange.

This ain’t Fox News or VICE

Ehh no he should have spoke about authoritarianism and not just libertarianism

Depends on what is meant by equality. Equality of opportunity is good but equality of outcome is terrible

@@Avr23 So equality of opportunity. I would say in the U.S. we are pretty good at that. Gay marriage is legal and POC are afforded the same rights as whites.

comment thief

The problem of equality is if everyone was equal then there would basically be no point in living since if one person becomes better than another than it ruins the whole idea of equality. Liberty is where you start in the same position and branch off depending on the choices you make.

@@gloriousgamers6172 don't get equality confused with equity. And whether or not there is a point or purpose to living shouldn't be the source of your argument. You can't say for sure. Humans are creative

Yes we will eventually out number them and replace all of the government with VRs and be T Posing as a high five. Our plan is fool proof .

Gaymers.

hell yeah.

That would be awesome 😂😂

GAMERS RISE UP

+OneManArmy Thank you for sharing the view from some of"all the green parts of Non-America".

+OneManArmy Not necessarily. In Britain we have the Liberal Democrats, and whilst the Liberal party before the merger were considered on the economic right, a 'brand' of Liberalism emerged called Social Liberalism. These believe in social liberty, but economic regulation in favour of personal and consumer rights. The Liberal Democrats sit both sides of the economic spectrum, but since Tim Farron took over as leader, it's fair to say we're a centre-left party now. So I identify as a Liberal, and am on the left of the economic spectrum, but I wouldn't identify as a Liberal in the American sense.

+OneManArmy However, like in American politics, most of the time they don't actually follow their ideologies and instead do whatever they need to to stay in power. Europe has different kinds of left and right-wing too. There are plenty of religious rightwingers, pure socialists (not to be confused with social democrats), green parties, anti-immigration parties, labor parties, and many more. There is a high diversity of political parties compared to the US.

+OneManArmy Same case in Australia where our far left party is The Greens, centre-left the Labour Party (American Liberal) as well as minor parties on that side like the Liberal Democrats and with the right of center being held by the Coalition which is a consortium of the Liberal Party and the National Democrats. We also have/had the party Palmer United Party but no one really knows what the fuck they stand for as it essentially fell apart after it won a balance of 6 seats out of 33 in the Senate (essentially holding the balance of power votes). And our election system is very different to the American version, i believe most EU and the UK have a similar preferential system to that used here in Aus

+ohrightthatswhy European Liberalism exists in many flavours. Social Liberalism is one of them and usually considered centre-left. That's why the Liberals in Germany (the FDP) are considered a centre party. Some of them are more on the left, others more on the right, but they all share the same core values.

+TVFILMBUFF austrailia does everything upside down :)

+TVFILMBUFF Liberal meaning "Economically Liberal" as it meant back when the party was created.

+TVFILMBUFF "Socialists" in America appropriated the words liberal and progressive because socialism isn't openly polite. Australians are historically CORRECT in their use of the word liberal. And, conversely, conservative is a word that no longer has any relationship with what it meant right up into the 20th century. You know statists are completely off in their use of the word liberal because I've actually heard them reference Marx as a liberal (shudder)

+TVFILMBUFF It's not paradox. Classical Liberalism= free trade, low taxes, democracy and rule of law. For example, classical (right-wing) liberal can be oppose to illegal immigration or gay marriages.

You mean Liberals everywhere except America are Conservatives.

Same!

@Spik Man Be careful what you guys wish for because without a choice of two parties you get authoritarianism. Just like the one Party system in North Korea.

Brett McNear I think he meant that he wants more than two parties...? Right?

@@genas6703 Yeah maybe you're right, maybe I misread it.

@Spik Man then what should we get. 5 or more parties?

Personally, I'm centre right, I can see both sides but I lean more towards conservative. I totally agree with you, why don't they create a center wing political party that has views everyone can at least respect. Or create a new version of the Democratic and Republican party.

my opinion = logic. your opinion = hitler and slavery.

That basically covers anything that would be discussed on politics.

Grow up.

its a bucket of chicken so wouldnt it be more suitable to say mold?

I agree, like the video and leave, avoid people who believe their opinions are facts.

+Gareth Dean Well my -ism is the best -ism and it's better than the other -isms and your stupid -ology!

+Vanalovan I would, but your -ology has ruined the country! If only my -ology could run things without your -ologists messing it up, our country would be Great again!

+Joseph Schmitz Your -ism's a doxoy and not even an ortho- one at that. Fie on you!

+Gareth Dean It's funny that people actually talk like this in real life with a strait face.

Information769 Funny and sad. You also get 'Your thing is -ology. And -ology is bad. So your thing is bad.' Does anyone know what socialism is anymore? What about what the Nazis did?To hear it it was anything from vegetarianism to flag waving.

Tristan McCoy It’s unbelievable. In the US you’re either right or left, Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative. This two party political system basically polarizes the population and discourages free thinking. “Oh, I’m a Republican therefore I must agree with all Republicans on topics X, Y, and Z.” The point is, people can disagree with both liberals and conservatives. It’s called independent thinking.

In Australia, we have many political parties but media (Rupert Murdoch) makes sure that only two are ever given a chance at winning. Actually these days it's completely biased towards one party, which is our equivalent of the Republican party, which is ironically called the Liberal Party.

I mean it wasnt designed to be. The first past the post system push us to be voting for the two popular parties on both side unless we want our vote to be wasted .

Yes George Washinston actually warned in his farewell address against a true party city. Most people tend to be liberal about somethings and conservatives about other things.

@@siriusb7346 The Democrats aren't even Leftists, they're Centerists.

Ron Swanson's actually supposed to be a libertarian.

True but still way more conservative that any liberal

+Todd Libertarians are very conservative... As in, constitution to the letter and no more!

+benaldo138 It certainly depends, you do have those "Constitutionalists" who principally are Conservative [i.e., supporting positions ubiquitously coined 'Conservative' - economic liberalism, weak federal governance, parochial power etc.] Though I wouldn't generalize, Libertarians in a American context is a very muddled label [frankly all over the world] as you have demonstrated. To start you have 'Anarcho-Capitalists', these "Libertarians" are more _extreme_ if you will than Moderate Right-Wing Libertarians such as Rand Paul. And far more "radical" than 'Fiscal Conservatives' . On the "left" you have an ample amount of "Libertarians", like for example: "Libertarian Marxists", "Anarcho-Communist", "Anarcho-Syndicalist" and "Libertarian Socialists". Similar to those on the "right" these individuals desire an enfeeble government, and/or total abolition of the state. All of these people are described as "Ultra-Left", "Radicals" or "Revolutionaries". Now if I omitted some labels I do apologize, and if I was ostensibly unfair to either "right" or the "left" I apologize. P.S: I personally view Nazism as 'Ultra-Right-wing', Hitler described Nazism as "syncretic". Clearly Socialism is universally associated with the "Left", however within the context of Nazism, Socialism was relegated . Nazi Germany did not attempt to implement Socialism, Hitler and his inner circle coupled with the Capitalists, domestically and abroad. So if anything Hitler, though opposing Capitalism himself, could be described as left-wing economically, but socially his was very much an 'Ultra-Rightist'. And his social views had a preponderance within his regime. P.S (2): Also radicalism and extremism isn't appalling in it of itself, some ideas that may be produced from these _extremists_ leanings may work, they just happen to be out of the mainstream. That goes for the "left" and the "right". P.S (3): Also regarding the "Left" libertarians some of the labels are often conflated and arguably they could be reasonably done so. But they do have their unique quarks and distinctions. [Edit (1): P.S (4): Regarding 'Moderate' Right-Wing Libertarians such as Rand Paul, these people are 'Libertarian Statist' or more congruently 'Libertarian Minarchist'.]

+Todd which is a conservative ideology.

The two party system is terrible. It's created by our voting systems however. #alternativevoteFTW

+MrJethroha Parties got fucked up by money, virtually all political parties are actually liberal and have no interest in reducing their size or spending. However, government parties that claim to be conservative tend to put out campaigns that appeal to conservatives and pay lip service to conservative views, even though they have no intention of actually putting them in place. Of course, dishonesty exists on openly liberal parties too, as Obama has proven quite eloquently.

We have more then two parties. It's just that we only ever vote for the two because all other parties are made up of extremists from the left and right.

+MrJethroha Vote Libertarian!

+SirVolcy Because you have to limit freedom to create equality. Some people don't want a bunch of people with guns telling them what to do and how to think and what is right and wrong. True freedom is the freedom to succeed or fail on your own merit. Conservatives don't blame people when they fail, they blame themselves and try again. Liberals blame other people, and cry about how life isn't fair, so they get the guys with guns to force everyone to value them. That's not freedom, that's state slavery. If everyone is equal, everyone is poor. See the USSR, China, any other far left nation, etc.

+TheClassicalSauce There are different kinds of equality. I believe in equality of opportunity and equality under the eyes of the law, but trying to force equality on gender and race is a fever dream. I am against quotas for minorities and women because to me that is extremely racist and sexist; having lower standards for them doesn't make them more equal it's just condescending as fuck. I believe people should be judged based on the content on their character, skills, and achievements.

TheClassicalSauce that's actually false. You don't not have to limit freedom to create equality. When liberals talk about equality, what usually is meant is equality of opportunity, socially, and under the law. We clearly do not have that. I do admit that some legislation is misguided in an attempt to fix this, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything. If a person fails on their own merit, they failed on their own merit. Everyone knows that life isn't fair. However the big issue with conservative boot strap theory is that they forget that some people don't have boots in the first place.

TheClassicalSauce there is no absolute freedom just like there is not absolute equality. That doesn't mean the two cannot coexist to a degree.

TheClassicalSauce no there isn't. That's why laws exist. You aren't free to slander, you aren't free rape, you aren't free to take my property. And yes they do come at the expense of each other in some degree.

In my experience, Orthodox (most religious) Jews and Israeli Jews tent to be more conservative, while conservative (between religious and secular) and reform (secular) Jews tend to me more liberal. Ben Shapiro is Modern Orthodox, while the majority of American Jews are reform or conservative. This is not always true, but in most cases I’d say it is.

A LIBERAL

You don't have to be a part of either, you could just be an independent. There are also other smaller political parties like libertarianism or socialism for example.

I agree

I m kind of conservative i am conservative in the moral and ethical way but i hope i am wrong but for me theese fanatical leftists has gone too far in their crazy demoralization of society some of them even are calling for peadophilia acceptance so i think that a democracy wouldnt work but we need a strong goverment a dictartoraship of some kind if you will

André Venturelli Liberals aren’t calling for pedophilia acceptance - in fact, they are rebuked by the act of pedophilia in and of itself. It’s just that with recent advancements in the fields of psychology and neural imaging, they’ve discovered physical deformities in the pedophile brain’s physical structures. This indicates that the issue of sexual attraction to children may very well be one borne of human mental illness in a significant number of individuals often mistakenly deemed as irreversibly and inherently evil by society.

It's in their name, really... All ideologies are, well, idealistic.

@Hunter Thompson libertarianism means that big buisness controls every thing we depend on. A fear of govorment is rational, but the way to make sure that it doesnt happen isnt trusting agropolies to make decision that efect everyone (witch was the best point against full govorment control of the economy, a thing no liberal agrees with), its making a govorment that represent the people.

+JMan #feelthebern

+James Craver Dude, Lincoln Chafee all the way #feelthechafe

+Sam Belanger LOL that was funny.

+James Craver Same here. Very interesting.

+James Craver He was talking about what generally what happens, there are always exceptions.

What about Europe's side of political theory aside Monarchy.

What? social democracy doesn't think that capitalism is destructive and that control should be as much as possible lmao, That would be democratic socialism at least, social democracy adapts capitalism to a mixed, more "human" system. The difference between a liberal (not the american conservative definition) and a social democrat is that the first says that the market is better at solving problems and should be regulated by the state when necessary, and the second says that the state is better at solving problems and should be liberalized(?) when necessary, its the two sides of the same coin at the center of the political spectrum.

you forgot craigist in your list

VMG_RATTPACK hello

Heeeeeeeeey

Lol gross

Wassup

howdy, but thats an odd way to say hello to conservatives watching the video,

I respect your opinion and value your contribution to making the world a better place, and acknowledge that you desire to see the country be the best it could be. However, I disagree. Without some form of equality of opportunity, true Freedom is impossible, as our circumstances can artificially restrict our choices.

Erik Zamudio equality is a vague term because in my opinion conservatives support equal opportunity while liberals support equal outcome

Momo Marsh well said I just had to comment

Cris Mike Both Sides? Then what do you support? It's not a side, it's a belief. Free market, or not? It's one or the other, one a liberal one a conservative (excluding ranging degrees of centrists of course).

Kyle D you can be Independent

Cris Mike reading this comment really relieved me

This comment thread gives me hope

Cris Mike Go Fascist then.

And economically liberal ;) fiscal refers only to government spending.

Owlblocks David Libertarians are economically conservative as well. They are against regulations against businesses and are for flat tax despite individual income.

That's called economic liberalism. Liberal = free. Fiscally conservative (government doesn't spend liberally) and economically and socially liberal (laisses faire for both).

Owlblocks David Libertarians are for small government overall. Less spending, less tax, less power. Which gives the people power. Socially they lean liberals, except pro guns, but economically they are conservative. Because we want less tax and regulation.

Less taxation and regulation is economic liberalism. I don't think you understand what liberalism is.

+Olivier Goulet I never really understood that either.

+Trevor Greenawalt it's because traditionally the left has been red (since the birth of socialism, liberalism is basically a watered down version of socialism) and blue is for capitalism because it stands for free trade the world over (our world is mostly water, which is blue. And what do you do with large bodies of water? You traverse them to trade with the people on the other side!).

Mr Monkey Josh I meant I never understood the colors of the political parties in the us.

+Trevor Greenawalt Originally Republicans were social and liberal while Democrats were conservative. They made a final shift in the 30s (with exception of 60s). The colors representing each stuck because tradition and less confusion

It just kinda happened. Nobody knows why.

+Vhailor Mithras But some are more wrong than others.

+Vhailor Mithras If we're having the discussion such that "sides" are even under consideration, that's a pretty sure sign everything is wrong.

+Vhailor Mithras finally a voice of reason.

tajniak4 except for the conservatives

@SteelStranger 8857 Why do you hate America and white people?

@@ottoiofgreece7585 Y'all are more toxic then my schools cafeteria food

@@ottoiofgreece7585 let's just say 5:17 has something do with it...

+Suitaloo But there's such a thing as libertarian statism, so it'd have to be defined in a way that is pretty much anarchy, if you want to compare libertarianism it to statism. Libertarian vs authoritarian, anarchy vs statism. Somebody like Ron Paul is pretty libertarian but he still believes in a state.

+VIGILANTIA there is such thing as minarchy (minimal state, a nightwatchman state)

VIGILANTIA Libertarian statism honestly sounds like an oxymoron...

+Suitaloo I too felt a little disgruntled at the fact that no nuance was discussed on the spectrum and that liberal and conservative weren't really defined, but were heuristically shown to relate to other beliefs and statistical likelihoods. I would stand in the very liberal and moderately libertarian camp. (Very left, mostly bottom) There's not really any political party to address my viewpoints in America. Maybe the socialist party would have if I were alive 100 years ago.

lordzallen yeah minarchy a better word libertarian statist lel

Aparently this is statistically untrue.

I know what Winston Churchill said, but it doesn't actually seem true according to most surveys.

Marven Corrielus really? Wouldn't Conservatives be already extinct if that was untrue?

Franz Ferdinand if the first part was true and the second part wasn't. Neither trend are statistically supported.

There were plenty of conservative young people in the 80's and 90's who are conservatives now.

+Aj Dembroski I agree. Although I think he may have been a tiny biased when he was explaining Liberal values. Although that could also be because I'm between Libertarian and Conservative myself.

Order is much better.

Autocratic supersonic hypnotic funky fresh

Make me your Supreme Leader and you'll never regret it, Pinky-swear.

Kyle Smit well to be honest if we're talking about civ 5 brave new world autocracy is paradoxically the best ideology as it unlocks futurism enabling you to do timing pushes with your artist's, writer's and musician's guilds giving you 250 tourism for every great person making you rack up like 1500 tourism in a dozen turns if you do it right, helping out a lot for the influence victory, especially considering it's really really hard to win through hard culture and tourism in multiplayer especially. The statue of liberty from the freedom tree is dope though. It's like secularism but with production.

In Civ 4, I always stand by universal suffrage. After all, Pyramids + Universal Suffrage before its prereq tech + All the religions = Victory

What about libertarian?

Brady Anderson yeah nothing wrong with a libertarian.

So a roundabout way of saying you're a racist, uneducated hick.

Misaka Mikoto woah that was a clear example of what an uneducated leftist looks like. Thank you! That was my first experience with one!

But... that would have made you pro-Jim Crow 100 years ago.

Something interesting is where you draw the line between what global matters concern a particular country in our heavily globalised society.

nictheperson They are just my personal views..

What you hate is neocon! Neocon old days used to be internationalist liberal of Truman. Then the Neocon hijack republican into war monger party. Neocon are establish well in Republican. The reason why democrat is weak anti war party, because they used to home of neocon. Even Hillary herself is internationalist feminist

What if we want to help a country that’s in conflict with another country?(dumb question right?

White Knight 5 White nationalism is more alt-right than conservative.

The struggle. Well put.

^ The only people who have ever attacked me for my gender have been liberals. I'm an active, and well respected member, of the Republican party. I've never once been attacked for being transgender, and the few times that I was accidentally misgendered were followed by sincere apologies.

yeah, there is a very strong authoritarian left currently present - i like to think of them as McFeminists or McLiberals. they're the ones that call Bernie Sanders, a guy who himself calls himself a feminist, a sexist and racist. they hide behind their own hack idea of feminism and liberal and blindly call those that disagree with them as sexist or bigot - such as calling *all* trump voters sexist and racist without wanting to understand why they voted for him and not wanting to understand why hillary was such a flawed candidate. i personally think of true liberals as stemming from New Deal ideas.

I agree with everything you've said, that still doesn't make me a republican

+Pumpkin Rot I would encourage you to look more into what Republicans honestly stand for.

+johnbtheperson Of course libertarians do. Libertarians see through the narcissism of the left and incredulousness from the far right.

+johnbtheperson Don't confuse conservatism with the Republican Party.

+johnbtheperson You mean neocons?

More like the one most likely to just leave you alone. Also, most ideological libertarians are Republican (myself included), not Libertarian, so I'm not sure the capital L is representative of the average American libertarian. And believe it or not, most aren't fixated on the roads. "Who'll build the roads" is more of a liberal go-to question, a tired left-wing FAQ whenever libertarianism comes up. Liberals become obsessed with the roads for some reason whenever a smaller government or Ayn Rand are mentioned.

Paisa Hero Unless you have your sights set on power through public office, why would you associate with a party?

So only if you are running for a political position, you should not have political view? so people who believed in Liberalism, Progressiveness, Conservatism, etc....

Paisa Hero Having a political view doesn't require associating with a political party if you have the ability to think for yourself.

KJ110813 I don't understand your reasoning, so the people of the us should not choose a party, because if you are a Progressive for example, it means that you would agree 100% with progressive candidates, and you won't be able to think for yourself? Look it's a free country, if people want to do something it does not impelled them to think critically, most active military personal oppose interaction policies, and yet war is the only reason why they are even around. Being part of something don't stop you from having a brain

Paisa Hero You said you're political standing is moderate, right? If that's indeed true, then it makes no sense to be a member of the Republican party as they're platform is extremely conservative. You can't be moderate and support the GOP (or the Democrats).

Yeah, it doesn't make much sense to me either. A liberal is supposed to be someone who's open to new ideas while a conservative is supposed to be someone who's more into keeping traditional values. I guess both sides kind of adopted which one suited them the most. Calling a right-winger a Republican and a left-winger a Democrat isn't technically right but whatever, it's 2019 I guess lol

It's weird in America because here our founding values are Liberalism, and thus are, in a way, the older traditions and values now for our society. We have a trend of very slowly increasing government control throughout our existence, and the more we increase government control, the more we risk pushing away from classic Liberalism, making classical liberals react conservatively against increases of power. This is not to say that all conservatives are classic liberals or that people in the modern day left cannot be classical liberals, simply that as we move towards more government, where classical Liberalism falls on the range of common ideologies shifts more and more to the conservative side since Liberalism is our old traditional ideology in America.

The entire series is about American government, it's Americentric by definition. If you saw the Party Systems video, you'd know the Gilded Age and the Great Depression kinda together inform the progressive/liberal movement in America - good government reforms, the trend towards protection of rights of minorities and civil liberties, the capability of government to alleviate poverty and direct the rebuilding of society. Conservatism, at least on the social side, is much as you say, though a majority of self-identified conservatives since the Nixon Era have been reactionary authoritarians who support the curtailing of freedom and the crushing of dissent.

There is a difference between a liberal and a leftists...liberals support liberty and free speech while leftists support censorship however the term liberal is often used interchangeable with progressive/leftist. Modern conservatives are not about conserving the status quo as much as they are about conserving our countries foundational conservative values as life, liberty, free speech and limited government True liberals and constitutional conservatives have a lot in common but with different approaches to various issues

America was founded on the principles of classical liberalism aka small government and the likes. So some liberterians and conservatives will tend to advocate those ideals since those were the traditional values of America

+BBBuilds12 Friedman killed the socialist in me.

+BBBuilds12 Yeah, that quote from a single Nobel laureate sure does trump all other views in existence. He is our one true god and his words are unchallengeable. /eyeroll

+Jachim Soyer I was simply stating a simple quote from an intelligent man to make an easy backup for my views. There is no need for sarcasm. I have plenty of other reasons for having the views that I do. I just figured people would ignore the comment if it was not brief, due to people's short attention spans these days.

I don't see it. Can you explain how this is true?

+TM04 Free trade. If I'm free to make my life better, to pursue my own goals and dreams, then I will end up benefiting everyone around me. A very simple example: I plant Carrots and you plant potatoes. Then I suggest we exchange. My carrots for your potatoes. Sounds fair? It may seem like we exchanged 1 for 1. But actually, we both eat better. Now I can focus on planting just Carrots. I become extremely good at it, and so do you with your potatoes, which we'll trade later. But there's only so much we can eat, there's extra production that comes from each of us being exceptional at our Trades, so... We can feed more people, have a bigger familly. All thanks to the human-exclusive ability that we call "trade". Screw opposable thumbs. What makes us really different from other animals is our ability to trade! It's the Invisible Hand. Andrew Carnegie didn't nearly gone bankrupt investing in a new process of making steel because he wanted to push Science forward. He just wanted to make money. J.D. Rockefeller didn't push for the invention of Otto-cycle engines because he was concerned with the possible environmental impacts of oil refining waste products. He wanted to sell what was left after the Kerosene was refined. Gave it the name "gasoline". Henry Ford did not invented the Model T to help his fellow man travel faster. He wanted to make money. As for a society that puts equality before freedom, refer to the Soviet Union. Or if you'd like a recent case study, read about Venezuela.

and I'm a mexican.

Me too, I'm Native American. We have a healthy distrust of the federal government.... for reasons.

RollOnToVictory hail my brother.ive always held conservative veiws.and what's crazy is that I went to a school with liberal teachers but built on conservative ideals.kinda like america.

***** let me guess? Liberal.

annnd thats why you guys lost this election.

ConnorNT yep. A+

Muh Abortions. Muh Mexican friends. Muh privelage.

ConnorNT Muh weed muh feminism muh genderless language

Couldn't have described it better, well done

Nobody: Literally nobody: Liberal socialists: The clapping is triggering to my anxiety

reivven Good

then ur dumb af

relax

Ian Jones you probably listen to crowder hahaha you dumbass

reivven I'm the other way around. My parents are super super conservative, whereas I am liberal.