Trotsky often describes liberalism in a very hostile manner. He mentions that the Social Democrats should fight against liberalism for a proletariat revolution.
Does he mean liberalism in the classical sense like libertarians?

He is hostile to Classic liberalism, and libertarianism, as they were associated with Imperialist (especially British Imperialist) policies.

In Russia the Kadet Party was liberal, it supported the Tsar, was largely drawn from the middle classes and was for a gradual transformation of Autocratic, feudal Russia into a modern, constitutional and capitalist country. It is against this party, and other similar, and smaller, parties that he is hostile to.

He certainly does not mean the liberalism that American shock Jocks are so against.

I have yet to find a man who is also an environmentalist, for example, who has any masculinity.
There is something inherently feminine about guys who are liberals. Why is this? Is it because
they have been beaten down by feminism? They are ashamed or afraid to be men? Is this
what liberalism has done to our manhood?

When I think of liberals, I think of willingly surrendering my rights without question or logic. That would make any man look weak in my eyes. Any woman, too. It’s funny because I think people should be able to do what they want (which in essence would make me a liberal), but I really hate liberals. Crazy world we live in…

it does wherever it exists?

Does anyone think that Political Correctness is anything other than a way to keep Liberalism from being exposed for what it truly is?

Is there anything more destructive(excluding WMD’s)

Could this NPR ordeal be the real beginning of the end, when combined with what we are seeing in Europe and in the US?

.

It is stockholm syndrome where you learn to love and identify with your captors. Haven’t you noticed that the liberals have absolute control of education, the media, Hollywood and the government and we have more liberals than ever before?

This is no coincidence!

I know it’s bad and there are a lot of reasons why but what are the key factors of why liberalism is bad for America please be specific as possible please.

Liberals are against the constitution and they are socialists. They also hate America.

For example the Constitution says what the government can and can not do.

Liberalism, on the other hand, says if there is a problem, let the government handle it. If not the Constituion what is the liberal framework for government? Why don’t you guys advocate for modifying it to meet your standards if they are not to your liking? Is it because there aren’t any?

This leap in "logic" makes no real sense. The word "government" in this nation means "the people" although right-wing Republicans keep trying to give a "four-letter" meaning to the word in an effort to mislead and obfuscate. Oversight is a duty or role established for the representative government that is the reality in the United States. OVERSIGHT, a Constitutional "standard." Which party attempts to ELIMINATE this role from government? Republicans keep on harping on the old "less government" schtick and foolish or under-informed "ditto-heads" (to quote Limbaugh) keep falling for the propaganda without once considering that this is the GOP’s Trojan horse con job: Less government REALLY means "remove all oversight—cut all regulations—let the for-profit fatcats set their own rules and just trust these greed-driven CEOs to do what is best for the American economy and for consumers"…yeah…r i i g g h h t. Democrats (Liberals, Moderates, and even a few Conservatives or "Blue Dog Democrats") RESTORE the Constitutional standards (as they have been doing now after the crazy deregulations of the GOP during their totalitarian years from 2001 through to 2007 when voters got wise and OUSTED them from power). Ever heard of "consumer protections"? Republicans do not believe in these, but Democrats most certainly do, as evidenced by OSHA, FDA, FAA, child labor laws, voting rights for women and persons of color, Civil Rights that were passed in the 1960s, minimum wage laws, EEOC, and assorted other agencies assigned the task of preventing ABUSES of the American people—enforcing the STANDARDS set within the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. You’re attacking the wrong party, young person.

What are the differences, if any, between the 2? The main difference that I may have found is that modern progressivism supports pacifism whereas modern liberalism is indefferent to the subject.

Websites, magazine articles, & book references are encouraged! Thanks for any & all info

Progressivism and modern Liberalism (which is called Social Liberalism) are the same thing. They advocate civil liberties and equality.

Any examples of 19th century nationalism and liberalism would be helpful. Thanks!

Nationalism:
The belief that nations will benefit from acting independently rather than collectively, emphasizing national rather than international goals.

Liberalism:

A political theory founded on the natural goodness of humans and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties, government by law with the consent of the governed, and protection from arbitrary authority.

liberals are rabid about their opinions. So tell us what good has been done by liberalism?

First of all, can I comment on the fact that you raised two questions:
"What has conservatism accomplished in America?" and
"What has liberalism ever actually accomplished in America?" and I wonder deeply about bias and what you are expecting. Word choice is EXTREMELY telling about someone…. and that made me very reticent to even add my two cents.

Then I double check your details to each question, and yes, in fact you are showing STRONG bias, and I wonder why. Maybe you care, or maybe you’re just looking to pick a fight… whatever it is, Im seriously turned off by your phrasing, thats for sure. Heh

I would say that liberals are no more "rabid" about their opinions that conservatives. We both hold passionate beliefs about how we believe money should be spent, the community should be taxed, the services that should be provided, the help given out, foreign policy and religion and the state… just because we hold different beliefs, does not mean one side is "rabid" while the other side is merely "tenacious"… just because you believe differently is no reason to hold contempt for the other side.

But, to finally answer your question:
Abolition was a liberal issue
Suffrage was a liberal issue
Women’s property rights was a liberal issue
Clean up of nuclear sites was a liberal issue
Freedom of Information act was a liberal issue
Welfare was a liberal issue
Social Security was a liberal issue
Farm subsidies remains a liberal issue
A woman’s right to her own body and control of her fertility is a liberal issue
Observance of the separation of Church and State is a liberal issue
Protecting the Freedom of Speech is a liberal issue
Protecting the Freedom of Religion is a liberal issue
Protecting the right to convene peacefully is a liberal issue
Fighting for and upholding the civil rights of women, racial minorities, gays and other religious/non-relligious beliefs has been a liberal issue
Protecting the privacy of American Citizens is a liberal issue
Ensuring our men and women in service are not tortured by refusing to torture men and women we are righting is a liberal issue
Allocating extra money for adequate body armor, vehicle armor and artillery for our forces in Iraq is a liberal issue
Trying to make sure that men and women in the service are volunteers and are allowed as much time at home as they spend in battle is a liberal issue
Protecting and preserving our national Forestlands and wildlife is a liberal issue
Sexual education that offers real information about sex, consent, STI’s and pregnancy is a liberal issue
Keeping Creationism out of the science class and in theology/seminary class is a liberal issue

I can go on…..

Some of these we have accomplished already, some of these we are working on… some of these WERE accomplished, but we are having to fight for them again.

The reason we had to fight for them, or have to fight for them, is because not everyone believes the way we do,… that is, well,… expected. But, as society grows more intelligent and more understanding of the world community… as society continues to evolve… radical liberal ideas go from being laughed at to being accepted as people grow closer. Conservatives are needed, too, though. No doubt about it. There needs to be a balance,.. a chance to see each other’s sides and try to understand and maybe take that into account when we are bringing up ideas next time.

Is postwar Japan better understood in terms of a return to liberalism of the 1920’s, or as a fresh start based on Occupation reforms? What did the Occupation of Japan go so smoothly and how does that compare to the recent American occupation of Iraq? How long would it take and at what rate of growth, for China’s economy to catch up to Japan’s? To reach the present Japanese per capita income? What obstacles to suc growth?

The trauma of the war, and the tight control of the occupation of Japan under MacArthur was such a drastic change to the government and cultural life of Japan that I think it is a fresh start.
The occupation of Japan went smoothly because the prestige and position of the emperor lent it prestige and legitimacy. There was still a government structure in place. With Iraq with the elimination of the Baathist regime which had such absolute power, and the inclusion of many groups that had no power under Saddam Hussein’s government, the new government was a complete and total restart.
As to China and Japan and their economies, that is outside my areas of strength of knowledge.

Since 1950s liberalism and secular leaders have almost destroyed the world. More crime, more wars, more hatred, less morals, child killers, 12 year olds who shoot people.

Seems like liberalism is a failed idea and atheism is moral-less.

I don’t have any sources to back up my claims but I know in my heart that if everyone accepted Jesus and followed his words, world would be a far better place.

Troll Rating 6.5/10 reasonable effort. A little too obvious towards the end.