Originally Posted by sillyeagle
Liberals want total freedom, fewer police/military that would interfere with those freedoms, so essentially more power to the people, yet they want big government to be in control which only serves to strip the power fromn the people. They want what goes against what they want. It's a walking contradiction.
Conservatives want less freedoms, solid rules and regulations, so more police and military to enforce the rules, yet they want small government. How can they want more rules, police and military yet want small government at the same time? Again walking contradiction.
That's rather easy to explain: You have your definitions mixed up. For one, self described liberals absolutely want more rules and regulations. The poster child economist of the democratic party, and self described liberal Paul Krugman talks these things up and down. To democrats, if something doesn't go your way in the slightest, it needs regulation. And they lobby hard against deregulation. I can't stress this enough - liberals/democrats are THE pro regulation camp.
The ones who want broadly increased freedom and smaller government would be the libertarians. That includes for example, complete legalization of drugs, prostitution, gambling, and unrestricted second amendment. Many other things as well. This is pretty much where I sit.
Chuck Schumer (Democrat) is currently in a mental crisis right now because the government is unable to comply with his order to kill off The Silk Road. He ordered the FBI/DOJ to cease its domain name and servers, not realizing just how stupid of a demand that is. But like many other people in his position, something that he can't control with an iron fist just pisses him the **** off. Chuck Schumer is also doing his damnedest to make sure that Americans can't gamble online. Harry Reid is still lobbying to get Nevada to completely ban prostitution.
Conservatives basically want the same thing, only their motivations are different. Democrats believe that they need to protect you from yourself (hence the active effort to ban soda, salt, trans fats, msg, etc.) Conservatives believe that they need to protect you from sinning against god. Libertarians believe that so long as you are protected from outside harm, you are free to take your own safety into your own hands.
Now here's where your inconsistencies come from: Conservatives say they want smaller government, but none of the politicians that they vote for actually do anything to implement it. And conversely, an unexpectedly large number of liberals are pro second amendment, but actively vote for and support politicians who are completely in favor of removing it.
Know what I think the problem is? I think the problem is too many people vote, without having any idea what it is they actually vote for. The "get out the vote" message is a bad one. If you don't educate yourself about what you're voting for, then you have the potential to cause more harm than good. Here's a perfect example of your modern voter, the so called "enlightened" college student which represents our future, actively supporting the idea that government intimidation is a good idea to fight political speech that you don't like:
I like what Penn Jillette said on the matter by the way. It can be summed up as being that if you vote for the lesser of two evils, then you are giving your endorsement and condonement to that evil. The South Park guys said basically the same thing, and they got harassed by the likes of Sean Penn for it. It's an unpopular thing to say, yet it's so true. Personally, I don't see myself participating in any future elections. The one person I voted for last election won that election, and he is already doing some things that I don't like.