re: #321 SteveMcGaziBolaGate

I try not to use the words ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’, or left and right. The former pair because they are pretty much meaningless. The latter because the boarding requirements of horses shouldn’t define our political discourse.

I prefer Jefferson.

Men by their constitutions are naturally divided into two parties: 1. Those who fear and distrust the people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the hands of the higher classes. 2. Those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence in them, cherish and consider them as the most honest and safe, although not the most wise depositary of the public interests. In every country these two parties exist, and in every one where they are free to think, speak, and write, they will declare themselves. Call them, therefore, liberals and serviles, Jacobins and Ultras, whigs and tories, republicans and federalists, aristocrats and democrats, or by whatever name you please, they are the same parties still and pursue the same object. The last appellation of aristocrats and democrats is the true one expressing the essence of all.

I also add the term barbarian to my usage. Barbarian as defined by H. Beam Piper as ‘someone who doesn’t understand civilization and wouldn’t like it if they did.’

The racists, theocrats and oligarchs that make up much of the ‘conservative’ movement these days are aristocrats. The anarchists, I mean libertarians, that make up the rest of it are barbarians.

Much more useful I think.