Revision as of 10:03, 26 May 2015 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,298,161 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Modern liberalism in the United States/Archive 2) (bot← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:51, 26 May 2015 edit undoRick Norwood (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users21,613 edits →Lincoln and LiberalismNext edit → | ||
Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
I removed fallacious information regarding the liberalism of Abe Lincoln. Freeing the slaves should not be considered liberalism...just common decency. Do not allow your own liberal bias to get in the way of constructive thinking. Thank you.--] (]) 04:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC) | I removed fallacious information regarding the liberalism of Abe Lincoln. Freeing the slaves should not be considered liberalism...just common decency. Do not allow your own liberal bias to get in the way of constructive thinking. Thank you.--] (]) 04:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC) | ||
Andrew Jackson is hardly a liberal hero. He is a hero to some libertarians, but liberals remember the Trail of Tears. | |||
The dictionary definition of liberalism is support for freedom and equality, and that is how liberals, and historians without an ax to grind, use the word. If freeing the slaves should not be considered freedom, what is?] (]) 11:51, 26 May 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 11:51, 26 May 2015
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Modern liberalism in the United States article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Archives | |||
Index
|
|||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
American versus European use of the term "liberalism"
I do not see the purpose of this section. We should just say that the terms "liberal" and "conservative" entered modern usage in the U.S. when Roosevelt used the terms in 1936. Schlesinger's essay is probably an oversimplification and dated anyway, and U.S. usage is creeping in too. But it is beyond the scope of the article to explain usage in different countries. TFD (talk) 04:45, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
- Except, I trust, to compare and contrast. Rick Norwood (talk) 13:03, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
- The main source used for the section does not seem to say anything about the use of the term. In my reading, all I have found is that in the U.S. the term came to be associated with supporters of Roosevelt, while in France it generally means neoclassical economic liberalism. And there are differences between liberal parties in different countries. But otherwise I do not see that the term takes on different meanings as one crosses borders. TFD (talk) 16:55, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Rjensen edit
Rjensen: there are a couple of typos in your recent edit. Do you want to fix them or shall I? Rick Norwood (talk) 12:04, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Liberals and Congress
This added section is really mostly about conservatives in congress. It is ungrammatical. It contradicts itself. It makes unsupported statements, such as the claim that Eleanor Roosevelt opposed equal rights for women. I tried to fix it, but reluctantly decided that it couldn't be fixed. Rick Norwood (talk) 12:01, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
- Eleanor never endorsed the principle of ERA. was a vigorous opponent of ERA from 1920s to 1951--she went quiet & insisted on the need for special protections. She chaired Kennedy's commission on women, whose report (released after her death) said ERA was not needed. It was Howard Smith the archconservative on race, who was a liberal on gender. He supported ERA year in year out for decades and finally got it written into law. see http://books.google.com/books?id=55XG0oS3XyYC&pg=PA184 & http://books.google.com/books?id=_R_3BgAAQBAJ&pg=PA173 In 1960 at the Democratic national convention the explicit opposition from liberal groups to ERA was overwhelming, It included the labor unions, AFL-CIO, ACLU, Americans for Democratic Action, American Federation of Teachers, American Nurses Association, the Women's Division of the Methodist Church, and the National Councils of Jewish, Catholic, and Negro Women. Citation = http://books.google.com/books?id=LF8ov6Vc4YQC&pg=PA209 Rjensen (talk) 13:33, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the information, Rjensen. I still don't see what Eleanor Roosevelt has to do with Liberals and Congress. Your version is a big improvement.Rick Norwood (talk) 15:33, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
- The ERA had to pass Congress before it could be sent the states, so Eleanor Roosevelt's refusal to support it was a big obstacle-- she was by far the most prominent liberal woman and Democratic woman in the 1945-62 era. Rjensen (talk) 16:35, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
- Before the Earl Warren, the Supreme Court generally used the Constitution to rule against liberal legislation. I wonder to what extent that influenced the debate. In any case, since we mention it was supported by liberals in the 60s and 70s we should mention they did not always do so. TFD (talk) 00:46, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Lincoln
While Lincoln is so popular everyone tries to claim him as one of their own, the fact that conservatives at the time favored slavery, states rights, and a small federal government, and Lincoln took the nation to war to establish the right of the federal government to enforce its laws in the several states, establishes him as a liberal by any reasonable definition of the term. He favored freedom and equal rights under the law. The argument that he is a conservative is, essentially, that he said he was a conservative in the Cooper Union speech, a campaign speech trying to win conservative votes. It was unsuccessful. Lincoln got almost no conservative votes, and the conservatives at the time hated Lincoln as much as they hate Obama today. Rick Norwood (talk) 20:04, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
- YIKES! Hold it right there. It is not true that "conservatives at the time favored slavery, states rights, and a small federal government". Andrew Jackson, the liberal hero, for example favored slavery and a small federal government. It is not true that "Lincoln is so popular everyone tries to claim him as one of their own" -- Blacks in recent decades have dramatically downplayed or even denounced Lincoln. " Lincoln took the nation to war to establish the right of the federal government to enforce its laws in the several states" is not true--He took the nation to war because the U.S. Army had been attacked and forced to surrender at Ft Sumter. It is not true that "conservatives at the time hated Lincoln" (Who are those mystery conservatives? In the North, the main elements that hated him were old-line Jacksonian Democrats ("Copperheads") and Irish Catholics (as in the 1863 New York draft riots). In fact he won over the support of many conservative Democrats, such as Stanton (who became his Secretary of War). A key point however, is that 19th century liberalism (which Lincoln did espouse) is very similar to modern libertarian versions of conservatism. For example Lincoln was strongly pro-business and pro-banks. But you might want to look at what historians have decided about Lincoln. William C. Harris in Lincoln's Rise to the Presidency says that Lincoln's "reverence for the Founding Fathers, the Constitution, the laws under it, and the preservation of the Republic and its institutions undergirded and strengthened his conservatism". Historian James G. Randall emphasizes "his preference for orderly progress, his distrust of dangerous agitation, and his reluctance toward ill digested schemes of reform". Randall concludes that, "he was conservative in his complete avoidance of that type of so-called 'radicalism' which involved abuse of the South, hatred for the slaveholder, thirst for vengeance, partisan plotting, and ungenerous demands that Southern institutions be transformed overnight by outsiders." Lincoln was the leader of the moderate and conservative Republican factions who fought the Radical GOP faction during the war. Rjensen (talk) 22:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
- Certainly Lincoln would not feel at home among what people today commonly call conservatives - people to the right of Reagan, the Bushes, Dole, McCain and Romney. But the Copperheads would feel right at home. The states rights issue is a red herring. Hamilton wanted a strong central state. Conservatives and liberals will switch side on states rights, free trade, the equal rights amendment, judicial activism and many other issues depending on which is more likely to achieve their core objectives.
- Lincoln btw never intended to end slavery in the South but to prevent its extension into the West. Like Hamilton, he saw the U.S. future as lying in trade, industry and commerce, which required the West be used to produce food for the cities rather than cotton for the UK.
- TFD (talk) 02:06, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Lincoln and Liberalism
I removed fallacious information regarding the liberalism of Abe Lincoln. Freeing the slaves should not be considered liberalism...just common decency. Do not allow your own liberal bias to get in the way of constructive thinking. Thank you.--173.75.33.123 (talk) 04:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Andrew Jackson is hardly a liberal hero. He is a hero to some libertarians, but liberals remember the Trail of Tears.
The dictionary definition of liberalism is support for freedom and equality, and that is how liberals, and historians without an ax to grind, use the word. If freeing the slaves should not be considered freedom, what is?Rick Norwood (talk) 11:51, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Categories:- All unassessed articles
- B-Class United States articles
- Mid-importance United States articles
- B-Class United States articles of Mid-importance
- WikiProject United States articles
- B-Class politics articles
- Mid-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- B-Class Philosophy articles
- Mid-importance Philosophy articles
- B-Class social and political philosophy articles
- Mid-importance social and political philosophy articles
- Social and political philosophy task force articles