Conservative: Maintain current status quo, or return to an older status quo.
Progressive: Opposite of conservative: progress from the current status quo, prevent returning to an older one
Liberal: Support individual liberty and egalitarianism.
Authoritarian: Opposite of liberal: Subject personal freedom and individual rights to an authority.
These are dated definitions, Veks, excluding Authoritarian.
Traditional liberalism seems to long since have died, as it has been seemingly co opted by people who describe themselves as 'Socialists'. People argue for liberty and the like, then stump for Socialism. I would like to direct everyone's attention to nearly every nation which has gone Socialist in the history of man.
How many succeeded? What's that? None? Or is it that true Socialism can not work in an imperfect world of imperfect humans? Or hell, maybe Socialism does not work because people like to own things? People are always trying to improve their social status, and amongst a large portion of humanity, the only real way to do that is to improve one's wealth. Something that does not apply in a true Socialist system.
Just as Marxist Communism does not function. When one person (or a small group) has ultimate authority, human nature dictates that it is likely that they will abuse that authority. The former Soviet Union, China, Vietnam, Cambodia, North Korea, Cuba, and Venezuela are all prime examples of this.
Just as well, nearly every Socialist or Communist nation openly tramples on the liberties of the people. This is a historical fact, and continues to this day. Why the so-called "liberals" seem to be in love with Communist Dictators (have you ever been to a large public University? The Communist Dictator loving kid population is growing) is completely beyond me.
The crazy part is, most of these people vote party line Democrat. I have been forced to rent with some of these individuals in the past, and frankly... just yeah. >.<
The media is biased.
Fox News is blatantly pro-Republican. As such, I do not use it as a news source.
MSNBC is blatantly pro-Democrat. As such, I do not use it as a news source.
CNN is blatantly pro-Democrat. As such, I do not use it as a news source.
NBC is not blatant in either direction, but appears to lean Democrat.
CBS is not blatant in either direction, but appears to lean Democrat.
...I can go on. This is the impetus behind the cries of the "liberal media". I cannot help but agree, while disagreeing. I agree that the media is pretty obviously in the tank more towards one party than the other, which is disheartening, as there may be intelligent and good representatives from either major party; while only one seems to be represented.
Some people cry about Conservatives being bigoted.
Kind of hard to be a bigoted Conservative when I myself am lesbian. I am for same-sex marriage, but against "gay" marriage. People of the same gender should be able to marry, however, we do not need the "gay" agenda pushed down people's throats. Not all homosexual and lesbian folks are "gay". Being "gay" is a particular lifestyle and/or a political belief. Many of these "gay" crusaders scream for their own rights, while trying to deny rights to heterosexuals in the same breath.
I am a Fiscal Conservative, while more Socially Liberal. Which, in essence, makes me a Libertarian.
Not all of us are bigoted or racist. A lot of us desire a smaller government, lower taxes, and greater personal freedoms. We need less government in our lives, with more personal responsibility.
Less generalizations, folks. Generalizations and grand sweeping statements make one look foolish.
All in all, I agree with Veks' original post, while disagreeing with small details. The intent is spot on, while the minutiae may be argued. I'd rather not get dragged down in minutiae, thanks.