Let's talk politics

[VoteRonPaul2008]

I'm relatively new to all of this, but by supporting Paul I def have a sudden interest in the political process. I've been a democrat my whole entire life, but now that I've learned what the republican party really stood for (non-intervention, protecting civil liberties, fisical responsbily etc.) I'm begining to think I may have been a republican all along..

My question is if that's what the GOP has stood for all along, then what do liberals/demcrats/progressives really stand for? are they the same big government socialists like Hillary or Barack or somehting different? can anyone elaborate?

 

[MN Patriot]

I'm relatively new to all of this, but by supporting Paul I def have a sudden interest in the political process. I've been a democrat my whole entire life, but now that I've learned what the republican party really stood for (non-intervention, protecting civil liberties, fisical responsbily etc.) I'm begining to think I may have been a republican all along..

My question is if that's what the GOP has stood for all along, then what do liberals/demcrats/progressives really stand for? are they the same big government socialists like Hillary or Barack or somehting different? can anyone elaborate?

The GOP was more libertarian in the old days. That is why the Libertarian Party was formed in 1971, out of disgust with Nixon's economic policies. I think the LP and the libertarian movement has advanced the theory of individual freedom, limited government and free markets beyond anything that has ever existed before. People always say libertarians want to return to the period of the late 1800's, which is nonsense. We have learned what works and what doesn't, so we need to keep moving forward, making "progress" in terms of freedom and prosperity.

100 years ago the term "liberal" is equivalent to "libertarian" now. They gradually turned 180 degrees and now are socialists. It would be a long history lesson, not sure I understand all of it myself.

Both parties have morphed into collectivists, socialists and corporate fascists, competing with each other for dominance. Of course the Establishment supports both factions, and they are the ultimate winners. That is why Ron Paul is such an outsider, he stands for freedom.

 

[forsmant]

Look it up. The parties have changed there platform gradually over time. Ron Paul would have been a democrat in the 1800's. At least until William Jennings Bryan came along. There was a slight shift of democrat to republican during that election which brought us William McKinley.

Republicans in the 1800's represented a big paternalistic governmental platform. Republicans started war with the south and passed many laws that trumped states rights. In 1898, Teddy Roosevelt, a republican, led us to victory over Spain.

With all the influx of Germanic immigrants who liked to drink, it was clear to the Republicans that they were becoming a permanent minority. They shifted toward the center on many issues. The southern democrats, mostly evangelical Christians, began to support prohibition and other big government ideas.

Now with two parties that were close to the center, many Americans decided to stay home. That trend continues today.

To my knowledge, the republicans have never realy represented personal freedom and small government.