Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
This article did a good job of showing how the different branches of "conservatism" are at odds with each other. As a libertarian with progressive tendencies who hangs out mostly with people who would classify themselves as "liberals", I see a paradoxical attitude toward immigration in their beliefs. On the one hand they give a great deal of vocal support to unions and on the other hand label as a "racist" anyone who points out that the tide of illegal immigrants undercuts the value of labor for native-born American citizens. And most liberals are also environmentalists, sympathetic to any effort to preserve wildlands, parks, etc. Of course, the human assault on the natural world is largely a consequence of overburdening the planet with an excess of people, most of whom develop consumerist tendencies in our culture. Most of the continuing increase in U.S. population has been shown due to the influx of recent immigrants.
Personally, I find the labels of "conservative" and "liberal" unduly divisive and useful mainly to those who plainly manipulate politics in this country through media control. Much more useful is the effort to build communities of interest from across the "political spectrum", to get people to think about issues themselves individually rather than just going along with what they have been told is the "liberal" or the "conservative" position.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
