Opinion of "Fiscally conservative, but socially liberal"

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Cassius is right. I wish they would stop pussyfooting and accept themselves as rightists in denial.

OK, I admit it, "fiscally conservative, but socially liberal" means right-wing!

I think aside from any other perjoratives you choose to throw at it, the fact that term is meaningless and undefinable sloganeering should tip you off to its uselessness.

Wait, nevermind, it's meaningless!

WOW U GOT ME

There is no contradiction. It's both meaningless pap and a cover for rightist views. A similar example would be a left-winger blathering about they "put people above profit". In both cases they have mistaken their own advertising slogan for a cohesive ideology.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Ultimately necessary for Marxism to succeed. That will be good for some people and bad for others.

luckily any resurgence in anti-capialism as an idealogy would reset the natural equilibrium, and the FCSL's would have to grow a spine and accept their own beliefs to counteract the menace.

[Antonio the Sixth]

There are many different shades/flavors of it, some of which I'm somewhat sympathetic to (see Marco Pannella).

The variant that's most popular in the US, however, is utter trash.

[sparkey]

WOW U GOT ME

There is no contradiction. It's both meaningless pap and a cover for rightist views. A similar example would be a left-winger blathering about they "put people above profit". In both cases they have mistaken their own advertising slogan for a cohesive ideology.

If it identifies a group, then it is meaningful, even if it started as a bit of a slogan. Most political groups define their own labels, and are often pretty meaningless if taken by themselves without any additional context, like who uses it. Nevermind "put people above profit," the term "progressive" fits the bill.

[DavidB.]

Why do you guys hate Western Ukrainians?

[Person Man]

In theory it is ideal to put the burden on the proponents of the expansion of the state for their case. However, anyone  who is anti-state entirely out of principle is dumb. On the whole, I vote FI just to troll.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

WOW U GOT ME

There is no contradiction. It's both meaningless pap and a cover for rightist views. A similar example would be a left-winger blathering about they "put people above profit". In both cases they have mistaken their own advertising slogan for a cohesive ideology.

If it identifies a group, then it is meaningful, even if it started as a bit of a slogan. Most political groups define their own labels, and are often pretty meaningless if taken by themselves without any additional context, like who uses it. Nevermind "put people above profit," the term "progressive" fits the bill.

Objectively all political labels (including progressive, with its silly whiggish overtones) are silly things to identify with. Nevertheless, the descriptor "progressive" in an American context is very defined. Somebody calls themselves a progressive you have a rough idea where they stand on "the issues" for the most part. Fiscal conservativism? That could mean a huge amount of things, from right-libertarians to Bloombergesque types to so much more - indeed I would argue the reason the Libertarian Party has collapsed into meh this cycle is because of its reliance on such an empty platitudes (HYUK HYUK I WANT GAYS TO HAVE GUNS TO DEFEND TEH WEED LOL). Worse, because it is very rare for politicians to actually advocate a structural deficit as a positive (as opposed to a temporary stimulus or as a necessary evil), the phrase "fiscal conservative" is additionally useless because there is no such thing as a "fiscal liberal".

The final terrible thing about it is that it is classic virtue signalling. Look at that "but". Doesn't it just drip with greasy self-satisfaction? "I'm not a pleb, I'm very special and have a unique political perspective that I've bet you've never considered, you partisan hack." Give me a break!

[sparkey]

Objectively all political labels (including progressive, with its silly whiggish overtones) are silly things to identify with. Nevertheless, the descriptor "progressive" in an American context is very defined. Somebody calls themselves a progressive you have a rough idea where they stand on "the issues" for the most part. Fiscal conservativism? That could mean a huge amount of things, from right-libertarians to Bloombergesque types to so much more - indeed I would argue the reason the Libertarian Party has collapsed into meh this cycle is because of its reliance on such an empty platitudes (HYUK HYUK I WANT GAYS TO HAVE GUNS TO DEFEND TEH WEED LOL). Worse, because it is very rare for politicians to actually advocate a structural deficit as a positive (as opposed to a temporary stimulus or as a necessary evil), the phrase "fiscal conservative" is additionally useless because there is no such thing as a "fiscal liberal".

"Fiscal conservative" not a specific term, no, but as you've said yourself, it's pretty much exclusively used by people on the right on economic issues. That's all it is meant to be. When libertarians use the term, we are indeed attempting to expand the tent and capture moderates who lean right on economic issues. What's wrong with that? And sure, nobody uses "fiscal liberal" because it doesn't sound good, but then nobody uses "regressive" or whatever the opposite of "progressive" is either, so you don't have much of a point there. It makes sense to say "fiscal conservatives and progressives oppose each other on economic issues." So the terms aren't useless.

The final terrible thing about it is that it is classic virtue signalling. Look at that "but". Doesn't it just drip with greasy self-satisfaction? "I'm not a pleb, I'm very special and have a unique political perspective that I've bet you've never considered, you partisan hack." Give me a break!

In a two-party system, we are poorly represented. Please excuse our disdain for the political persuasions that are more well represented.

[HisGrace]

Pretty much describes me (although I'd be more comfortable using social moderate these days since social liberalism has started to be identified with the censorious hyper-PC crowd) so I voted FI.

I'm always surprised when mainstream liberals react with such hyper negativity when this concept is brought up. They react even more negatively to fiscal cons/social libs than they do to regular conservatives. It seems like they'd like them better since they at least agree with them close to half the time (abortion, gay marriage, drug policy, criminal justice issues, church-state issues, immigration, anti-terrorism/privacy issues exc). It's like they don't know what to do when they meet someone who they disagree with on economics and they can't just dismiss them as racist/sexist/whateverist or as a religious nut so they shut down and throw a fit.

I hope people aren't implying the inverse of this is any better.

The inverse includes the worst tyrants and mass murderers the world has seen, plus Trump. Seems like there'd be a thread bashing them.

[TJ in Oregon]

Don't agree on much, but really the main beef here is that the media has spent the last decade pretending they are the only type of swing voter in existence. That whole paradigm helped to push the GOP into its current nihilistic breakdown: throwing out all interests except those who make up ~5% of the country and whose interests are seen as malevolent for the majority of Republican voters isn't a good recipe for success.

[HisGrace]

Don't agree on much, but really the main beef here is that the media has spent the last decade pretending they are the only type of swing voter in existence. That whole paradigm helped to push the GOP into its current nihilistic breakdown: throwing out all interests except those who make up ~5% of the country and whose interests are seen as malevolent for the majority of Republican voters isn't a good recipe for success.

They've shown plenty of devotion to issues such as abortion, gay marriage, and gun control that alienate huge segments of the population.

[Xing]

Something teenagers who know nothing about politics say to sound hip and informed. See also: "Both candidates are equally horrible in every way!"

[Maxwell]

Something teenagers who know nothing about politics say to sound hip and informed. See also: "Both candidates are equally horrible in every way!"

oh my god yes i encounter this every single day it makes me hurt

[Ljube]

like me, lol

[Mercenary]

Almost the opposite of me in many ways. But since most people cannot distinguish personal views from political ones they will never understand the difference between social liberalism and social libertarianism.

Thus at times it can appear I am in agreement with an ideology that I share little in common with.

[Murica!]

Despicable, nihlistic, and overall disgusting. Needs to be purged from American politics.

Wait, where does nihilism come into play?

[White Trash]

Despicable, nihlistic, and overall disgusting. Needs to be purged from American politics.

Wait, where does nihilism come into play?

The concept of being "fiscally conservative, socially liberal" usually entails the rejection of principle and altruistic morality. This is not always the case, but the current strand of this ideology is certainly nihilistic in nature.

[Murica!]

Despicable, nihlistic, and overall disgusting. Needs to be purged from American politics.

Wait, where does nihilism come into play?

The concept of being "fiscally conservative, socially liberal" usually entails the rejection of principle and altruistic morality. This is not always the case, but the current strand of this ideology is certainly nihilistic in nature.

That's a very simplistic way of putting Nihilism into terms, and is more similar to a misinterpretation of Nietzsche's individualism than what actual Nihilism is. We must also remember that FCSLs tend to overly moralize, simply with a false sense of individualism, much like you* and other "socially conservative" leftists tend to overly moralize with a false sense of "Community."

Not meant as an insult, simply a criticism.

[White Trash]

Despicable, nihlistic, and overall disgusting. Needs to be purged from American politics.

Wait, where does nihilism come into play?

The concept of being "fiscally conservative, socially liberal" usually entails the rejection of principle and altruistic morality. This is not always the case, but the current strand of this ideology is certainly nihilistic in nature.

That's a very simplistic way of putting Nihilism into terms, and is more similar to a misinterpretation of Nietzsche's individualism than what actual Nihilism is. We must also remember that FCSLs tend to overly moralize, simply with a false sense of individualism, much like you and other "socially conservative" leftists tend to overly moralize with a false sense of "Community."

You're right. I can admit that my knowledge of Nihilism is limited to a reading of Thus Spoke Zarathustra and Ecce Homo many, many moons ago. So my view on the philosophy is admittedly, fairly simplistic. I can see your point that both FCSLs and Communitarians like myself do have a tendency to overly moralize political issues, but I wouldn't go as far to say that it is a false sense of "individualism" or "community" driving it.

[TJ in Oregon]

Despicable, nihlistic, and overall disgusting. Needs to be purged from American politics.

Wait, where does nihilism come into play?

The concept of being "fiscally conservative, socially liberal" usually entails the rejection of principle and altruistic morality. This is not always the case, but the current strand of this ideology is certainly nihilistic in nature.

That's a very simplistic way of putting Nihilism into terms, and is more similar to a misinterpretation of Nietzsche's individualism than what actual Nihilism is. We must also remember that FCSLs tend to overly moralize, simply with a false sense of individualism, much like you and other "socially conservative" leftists tend to overly moralize with a false sense of "Community."

You're right. I can admit that my knowledge of Nihilism is limited to a reading of Thus Spoke Zarathustra and Ecce Homo many, many moons ago. I can see your point that both FCSLs and Communitarians like myself do have a tendency to overly moralize political issues, but I wouldn't go as far to say that it is a false sense of "individualism" or "community" driving it.

I would argue the bolded is actually impossible: all political issues are moral issues, at least in an abstract sense. I would never deny the existence of prudential decisions or honest disagreement about the effects of various policies, but the aims in enacting whatever each side views as good must contain some moral component to it. If say, candidate A says we need to preserve food stamps because if we cut it then people will starve, then candidate A is making both a claim that cutting the program would lead to a difficulty for poor people to get food, and that it would be a bad thing for people to starve. The latter point may be completely uncontroversial and generally not stated in a political debate, but it is still a moral argument.

[Murica!]

Despicable, nihlistic, and overall disgusting. Needs to be purged from American politics.

Wait, where does nihilism come into play?

The concept of being "fiscally conservative, socially liberal" usually entails the rejection of principle and altruistic morality. This is not always the case, but the current strand of this ideology is certainly nihilistic in nature.

That's a very simplistic way of putting Nihilism into terms, and is more similar to a misinterpretation of Nietzsche's individualism than what actual Nihilism is. We must also remember that FCSLs tend to overly moralize, simply with a false sense of individualism, much like you and other "socially conservative" leftists tend to overly moralize with a false sense of "Community."

You're right. I can admit that my knowledge of Nihilism is limited to a reading of Thus Spoke Zarathustra and Ecce Homo many, many moons ago. I can see your point that both FCSLs and Communitarians like myself do have a tendency to overly moralize political issues, but I wouldn't go as far to say that it is a false sense of "individualism" or "community" driving it.

I my self am no expert on Nihilism myself as I am an existentialist, not a nihilist, and most of my familiarity with it comes from proto-nihilists such as Max Stirner then actual Nihilists)  I simply do not enjoy when philosophies that have at the very least interesting ideas are used as insults.

[Murica!]

Despicable, nihlistic, and overall disgusting. Needs to be purged from American politics.

Wait, where does nihilism come into play?

The concept of being "fiscally conservative, socially liberal" usually entails the rejection of principle and altruistic morality. This is not always the case, but the current strand of this ideology is certainly nihilistic in nature.

That's a very simplistic way of putting Nihilism into terms, and is more similar to a misinterpretation of Nietzsche's individualism than what actual Nihilism is. We must also remember that FCSLs tend to overly moralize, simply with a false sense of individualism, much like you and other "socially conservative" leftists tend to overly moralize with a false sense of "Community."

You're right. I can admit that my knowledge of Nihilism is limited to a reading of Thus Spoke Zarathustra and Ecce Homo many, many moons ago. I can see your point that both FCSLs and Communitarians like myself do have a tendency to overly moralize political issues, but I wouldn't go as far to say that it is a false sense of "individualism" or "community" driving it.

I would argue the bolded is actually impossible: all political issues are moral issues, at least in an abstract sense. I would never deny the existence of prudential decisions or honest disagreement about the effects of various policies, but the aims in enacting whatever each side views as good must contain some moral component to it. If say, candidate A says we need to preserve food stamps because if we cut it then people will starve, then candidate A is making both a claim that cutting the program would lead to a difficulty for poor people to get food, and that it would be a bad thing for people to starve. The latter point may be completely uncontroversial and generally not stated in a political debate, but it is still a moral argument.

Only at the surface, and only without consideration of self-interest and material conditions, not to mention the question of the mere nature of "morality" and whether or not something of the type truly "exists".

[White Trash]

Despicable, nihlistic, and overall disgusting. Needs to be purged from American politics.

Wait, where does nihilism come into play?

The concept of being "fiscally conservative, socially liberal" usually entails the rejection of principle and altruistic morality. This is not always the case, but the current strand of this ideology is certainly nihilistic in nature.

That's a very simplistic way of putting Nihilism into terms, and is more similar to a misinterpretation of Nietzsche's individualism than what actual Nihilism is. We must also remember that FCSLs tend to overly moralize, simply with a false sense of individualism, much like you and other "socially conservative" leftists tend to overly moralize with a false sense of "Community."

You're right. I can admit that my knowledge of Nihilism is limited to a reading of Thus Spoke Zarathustra and Ecce Homo many, many moons ago. I can see your point that both FCSLs and Communitarians like myself do have a tendency to overly moralize political issues, but I wouldn't go as far to say that it is a false sense of "individualism" or "community" driving it.

I my self am no expert on Nihilism myself as I am an existentialist, not a nihilist, and most of my familiarity with it comes from proto-nihilists such as Max Stirner then actual Nihilists)  I simply do not enjoy when philosophies that have at the very least interesting ideas are used as insults.

Given that Nihilistic philosophies (especially Stirner's Egoism), are entirely opposed to my personal viewpoints and set of moral values, I can find them both interesting and despicable. I thoroughly enjoyed reading "The Ego and It's Own", and found Stirner's ideas to be fascinating and interesting, I can still find them to be an amoral outlook on life.

[Murica!]

Despicable, nihlistic, and overall disgusting. Needs to be purged from American politics.

Wait, where does nihilism come into play?

The concept of being "fiscally conservative, socially liberal" usually entails the rejection of principle and altruistic morality. This is not always the case, but the current strand of this ideology is certainly nihilistic in nature.

That's a very simplistic way of putting Nihilism into terms, and is more similar to a misinterpretation of Nietzsche's individualism than what actual Nihilism is. We must also remember that FCSLs tend to overly moralize, simply with a false sense of individualism, much like you and other "socially conservative" leftists tend to overly moralize with a false sense of "Community."

You're right. I can admit that my knowledge of Nihilism is limited to a reading of Thus Spoke Zarathustra and Ecce Homo many, many moons ago. I can see your point that both FCSLs and Communitarians like myself do have a tendency to overly moralize political issues, but I wouldn't go as far to say that it is a false sense of "individualism" or "community" driving it.

I my self am no expert on Nihilism myself as I am an existentialist, not a nihilist, and most of my familiarity with it comes from proto-nihilists such as Max Stirner then actual Nihilists)  I simply do not enjoy when philosophies that have at the very least interesting ideas are used as insults.

Given that Nihilistic philosophies (especially Stirner's Egoism), are entirely opposed to my personal viewpoints and set of moral values, I can find them both interesting and despicable. I thoroughly enjoyed reading "The Ego and It's Own", and found Stirner's ideas to be fascinating and interesting, I can still find them to be an amoral outlook on life.

Well, that's the point of(orthodox) Stirnerite Egoism, no?

[Antonio the Sixth]

What "interesting ideas" do you get out of nihilism, Murica? Genuinely curious.