Which hypothetical party would you vote for?

Which party would you vote for?

  • Economically Conservative, Socially Liberal

    Votes: 39 100.0%
  • Economically Liberal, Socially Conservative

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    39

eMac4ever

macrumors regular
Original poster
Nov 26, 2005
168
0
In most of the world's industrialized countries, those with conservative social views are more likely to have conservative economic views and likewise with the liberals.

I was thinking about What's The Matter With Kansas the other day, when it occurred to me that this could change, at least in the United States.

Let's say that the rural poor begin to vote in their own, direct economic self-interest and against the Republicans. In order to accomplish this, the Democrats would have to move pretty far to the right on social issues. I would think that liberals would find this pretty abominable and would possibly join the ranks of a less-extreme Libertarian Party. I am not sure this whole thing is too likely; I'm just kind of speculating here.

So, the question is, who would you vote for, given this chance: a socially conservative, economically liberal party or an economically conservative, but socially liberal party.

As more of a liberal, I don't know. I value both social and economic issues so much, but if I had to vote for one, I suppose I would vote for whoever was more liberal on social issues, given my more moderate economic stances.
 

bobertoq

macrumors 6502a
Feb 29, 2008
599
0
Fiscal conservative, social liberal. I just can't stand social conservatism. Oh wait...
 

ucfgrad93

macrumors P6
Aug 17, 2007
17,539
8,164
Colorado
Given your choices, I would choose economically conservative and socially liberal. I think our country is in such a fiscal mess that it takes precedence over social issues right now.
 

OutThere

macrumors 603
Dec 19, 2002
5,730
0
NYC
An economically conservative, socially liberal political platform would advocate social freedoms (gay marriage, legal marijuana, abortion rights) while trying to reduce spending and try to balance the budget. The trouble here would be reconciling this budgeting with a social liberalist impulse for social justice: welfare programs, healthcare etc.

A socially conservative, economically liberal is a decent description of the George W. Bush administration. Though 'economically reckless' is perhaps a better term. ;)
 

eMac4ever

macrumors regular
Original poster
Nov 26, 2005
168
0
Sure. Look at California- a socially liberal state with tremendous budget problems.
I do not think that the budget crisis is a result of their social liberalism, though. I am more likely to think that the root cause of social and economic liberalism is the same, rather than that social liberalism causes economic liberalism (or, as you style it, fiscal irresponsibility)
 

IgnatiusTheKing

macrumors 68040
Nov 17, 2007
3,652
0
das Fort
One can be fiscally conservative and socially liberal, if "liberal" is taken at it's true meaning and not the one both Republicans and Democrats in this country use. Someone truly "liberal" doesn't really care what other people do so long as it doesn't negatively impact others/society at large. But instead, we have a bunch of activists who are constantly screaming and sticking their noses in everyone else's business.

No matter what the issue, you are not "liberal" if you are trying to force your views on social issues on someone else.
 

ahunter3

macrumors 6502
Oct 15, 2003
375
4
One can be fiscally conservative and socially liberal, if "conservative" is taken at its true meaning and not the one both Republicans and Democrats in this country use. Someone truly "conservative" believes that government's spending must stay within its means and not tax the people beyond theirs; instead we have a bunch of reactionaries trying to get rid of all taxes and federal spending, effectively stripping the government of all functions except the police function of protecting the property interests of the wealthy.

No matter what the issue, you are not "liberal" if you are trying to force your views on social issues on someone else.
I would agree with that.

And you are not "conservative" if you are trying to eliminate all social services regardless of how well-funded or fiscally well-managed.
 

OutThere

macrumors 603
Dec 19, 2002
5,730
0
NYC
One can be fiscally conservative and socially liberal, if "liberal" is taken at it's true meaning and not the one both Republicans and Democrats in this country use. Someone truly "liberal" doesn't really care what other people do so long as it doesn't negatively impact others/society at large. But instead, we have a bunch of activists who are constantly screaming and sticking their noses in everyone else's business.

No matter what the issue, you are not "liberal" if you are trying to force your views on social issues on someone else.
We've got two definitions of liberalism floating here. 'Classical liberalism' (small government, free market, personal freedoms) was a foundational political philosophy of early America. More recently we have developed 'modern liberalism' or 'social liberalism', which advocates the inclusion of social welfare in a society of liberty and equality.

In common discussion of U.S. politics 'liberalism' is interchangeable with 'modern liberalism'.
 

bobertoq

macrumors 6502a
Feb 29, 2008
599
0
The two are incompatible, as social liberalism leads to fiscal irresponsibility.
Are you sure? "If you legalize drugs you are contributing to the debt! But the Iraq and Afghanistan wars don't count...."

Correlation =/= Causation

Sure California is in a budget crisis, but that's what happens when your state is run by someone like Schwarzenegger.... Look at Reagan and the first Bush. They pretty much quadrupled our debt. Therefore social conservatism leads to fiscal irresponsibility. Right?

No. Fiscal irresponsibility is not a right-wing or a left-wing idea.
 

Thomas Veil

macrumors 68020
Feb 14, 2004
2,435
5,524
OBJECTIVE reality
Neither. I'm a social and economic liberal. I believe in balanced budgets, but I think deregulation is totally irresponsible. So I guess I don't fit into either category.

Glad to see you mention "What's the Matter with Kansas," though. A great book, and one that I've recommended here several times, especially for anyone who wonders how the hell Americans can so frequently vote against their own interests.

Sure. Look at California- a socially liberal state with tremendous budget problems.
Let's not forget those problems began and became horrendous via stuff like electric rate deregulation...a classic conservative position.
 

itcheroni

macrumors 6502a
Sep 23, 2005
547
1
CA
socially liberal, economically conservative = Libertarian

socially moderate, economically liberal = Democrat
socially conservative, economically liberal = Republican

Neither major party is economically conservative in my opinion. That is why our economy is in so much trouble.

And the Democratic party is nowhere near socially liberal enough for me to respect them even on that point.
 

GfPQqmcRKUvP

macrumors 68040
Sep 29, 2005
3,211
373
Terminus
The two are incompatible, as social liberalism leads to fiscal irresponsibility.
Thinking gays should have the right to marry and that the government shouldn't meddle in its citizens' private business leads directly to fiscal irresponsibility? I guess you learn something new everyday. Thanks stevegmu!
 

Queso

Suspended
Mar 4, 2006
11,832
7
Social liberalism, as I understand it, is more akin to what Americans call libertarianism, namely that adults should be trusted to choose their own paths through life. Just goes to show how the definition of terms differ between countries.
 

Don't panic

macrumors 603
Jan 30, 2004
5,551
695
having a drink at Milliways
Given your choices, I would choose economically conservative and socially liberal. I think our country is in such a fiscal mess that it takes precedence over social issues right now.
interesting. to me would be the same choice for exactly opposite rerasons.

human rights, social justice, intellectual honesty should always be the #1 priorities.
than you try to make the economy work within that frame.