Re: [OT] Liberals was: Personal hoody-hoo

Don M. wrote in reply to KHR:

> >As far as I understand US politics (who does? ) US 'Liberals' are
what
> >we over here would call Social Democrats or even Socialists. Ready to
> >tax the rich to give to the poor. Rather vociferous about helping the
> >'Third World'. 'Politically correct' in the bad sense of that word,
etc.
[...}
> >In Europe, it would be quite unusual for a memeber of a Communist
party
> >to b ecalled a 'Liberal'.
>
>But they can be "Greens" can't they? Ours can be also and generally
are.

European Greens are generally *US-style* "Liberals", just like your
Greens are.

As KHR wrote above, US-style "Liberals" and European-style Liberals are
not 
the same thing at all - which means that most European Greens interpret
the 
word "Liberal" as a rather serious insult.

John Atkinson replied to Imre A. Szabo:

> >You are missing fact that hegemonies and imperiums invariably end up
> >crushing freedoms and liberties. In other words "if we can force
other
> >states to do what we want all the time, why can't we force our own
citizens
> >to do what we want. It's for their own good, after all."
>
>The British managed to avoid such. And they ran 2/3
>the planet's surface for a couple centuries.

Er, well... only if you count the oceans :-/ And I'm not entirely sure
that 
all Africans, Indians, Amerindians, Aboriginies etc. would agree that
the 
British "managed to avoid" crushing their liberties and freedoms,
either...

Later,

Oerjan
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
-Hen3ry