re: #242 Sharmuta

You need to un-learn what you have learned. The left-right dichotomy is flawed. But the type of conservative that was Buckley and Senator Goldwater is more in-synch with the constrained vision. It is false that those who wish to use the might of government to push social issues are “conservatives”. They are something else. Certainly they’re in the party and call themselves conservatives, and we would call them “social conservatives”, but they are not a part of the Goldwater mold.

Getting back to the dichotomy- it is the difference in a person’s view of the proper role and scope of government that distinguishes between the two visions. One vision is suitable for a democratic republic, the other leads to socialism or other forms of authoritarianism where the boundary between the rule of law and the rule of men is broken.

Authoritarianism has historically shown itself to really hold no partisan link although a too-small government had also proven its own worth in the age of Standard Oil. Perhaps this ‘vision’ for a democratic republic would be more toward the center of that chart?