There is a spectrum of positions that might be labelled "Classical Liberal".
I am at home with empirical, peace-loving, limited-state Classical Liberals.
Link to an article by Mario Rizzo, a NYU law professor who teaches seminars on this subject:
https://www.thinkmarkets.wordpress.com/2014/02/05/libertarianism-and-classical-liberalism-is-there-a-difference
Definitions are always murky in politics. Now that socialism seems to be enjoying something of a vogue, everyone seems to define it differently. They want you to be sure they have nothing in common with those awful National Socialists or Soviet Socialists who made the century just past so interesting, but what are they really talking about?
Some seem to want Capitalism with a plumper welfare state grafted on. Others seem to prefer a dirigiste state that controls and regulates our material lives while leaving property nominally private. Others view the economy as essentially zero sum, and believe it to be government's job to equalize our situations through redistribution. As has been said, a government that robs Peter to pay Paul can usually rely on Paul's support. A hard core would like to nationalize some or all industries on the theory that governments are smarter and more disinterested than markets. From the people who want to tell you that roads are socialism, so what's the harm in a bit more, to hardcore Marxist-Leninists, one word seems to have many meanings.
Interestingly, on another online discussion in the comments of a YouTube video someone said this to me: "Wah, wah! Mah individualism! You are a Dave Rubin cuck classical liberal..." This was followed by a comment about "race-mixing" and calling me a "Jew."
So this is apparently what happens when you comment on a Red Ice video on YouTube and call them on their BS. haha
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)