[beenBinybelia]

Why french or german conservatives would in many aspects be liberals in the US and why the neocons just don´t get it...

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/inte...395120,00.html

[viagra_generic]

Your man needs a little bit more straw.

[2swasseneons]

Huh ? not sure to get you ?

[spineeupsenry]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawma...c_and_rhetoric

[Ceriopal]

Would you enlighten me ?

[BruceQW]

Would you enlighten me ?

Well ok, you put the mouse cursor over the underlined text in my last post and doubleclick.

[chuecaloversvvp]

Guess what, i did that, but where is the "straw" in the article?

[lE3l6Lgn]

From the first word to the last is a good start.

[Drugmachine]

Why french or german conservatives would in many aspects be liberals in the US and why the neocons just don´t get it...

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/inte...395120,00.html

I would cringe if Le Pen was elected Prime Minister of France. He would make neocons liberal by his definition. Furthermore, Clinton, Reid, and all other Democrats serving in Congross today would be considered ultra conservatives in Europe. Perhaps Europe also needs political lessons on US governance when discussing US politics.

[venediene]

Voland is not alone, I also lack to see the straw man in this article.

Some American conservatives believe they share a common view with European conservatives. The author of the article tries to deny.

And although I may not support everything from the article, I think he is right in principal.

[Dynasty]

I would cringe if Le Pen was elected Prime Minister of France. He would make neocons liberals by his definition. Furthermore, Clinton, Reid, and all other Democrats serving in Congross today would be considered ultra conservatives in Europe. Perhaps Europe also needs political lessons on US governance when discussing US politics.

Le Pen is IMHO no conservative. He is a racist and fascist with some conservative views.

Does the exageration of conservativism really means hating minorities and persecute them? Just curious.

My I remind you, Hitler was not really a conservative. The term "Nationalsozialistische Arbeiterpartei Deutschlands" was not a pure whole phrase, you know. Do you know the "Kraft durch Freude" programme? The fight against unployment was a focus in Hitlers pre war propaganda.
Xenophoby, Genocide etc, do not really have to be based on conservativism.

PS: Please dont get me wrong. I am not trying to find sommthing good in the 3rd Reich. In principal all the stuff was only fascade, only the side effects of aramament. But I somehow wanted to bring in this view.

[vNQmO2BF]

Voland is not alone, I also lack to see the straw man in this article.

Doesn't matter, Slarti. "G Man" is a "satirist" here to be sarcastic and obnoxious. He's not here for political discussion.

[BPitt]

Le Pen is IMHO no conservative. He is a racist and fascist with some conservative views.

Does the exageration of conservativism really means hating minorities and persecute them? Just curious.

My I remind you, Hitler was not really a conservative. The term "Nationalsozialistische Arbeiterpartei Deutschlands" was not a pure whole phrase, you know. Do you know the "Kraft durch Freude" programme? The fight against unployment was a focus in Hitlers pre war propaganda.
Xenophoby, Genocide etc, do not really have to be based on conservativism.

PS: Please dont get me wrong. I am not trying to find sommthing good in the 3rd Reich. In principal all the stuff was only fascade, only the side effects of aramament. But I somehow wanted to bring in this view.

I agree wholeheartedly that Le Pen is most definitely utra racist, from what I have read. However, the US newspapers tend to lump him with ultra conservatives, like the John Birch Society, but not quite to the Aryan Nation political dogma. But to answer your question, in the US, if you are conservative, there is sometimes an automatic association between conservativism and racism, specifically programs that are being cut because of lack of need. One instance that comes to mind was the EITC recertification program that was started 2 years ago. It was forcifully argued that such a program, started by a conservative administration, was being racist and bigoted while not arguing the merits of the program. I can cite other examples if you like.

Relating specifically to the article, I find it extremely yellow journalistic to make a political assumption to a relationship between 2 political leaders. More specifically, the article seems to give only a single side point of reference to a political doctrine that is more complicated than the author gives credit. This is why I find the article amuzing, not serious.

[geniusxs81]

Le Pen is IMHO no conservative. He is a racist and fascist with some conservative views.

Does the exageration of conservativism really means hating minorities and persecute them? Just curious.

My I remind you, Hitler was not really a conservative. The term "Nationalsozialistische Arbeiterpartei Deutschlands" was not a pure whole phrase, you know. Do you know the "Kraft durch Freude" programme? The fight against unployment was a focus in Hitlers pre war propaganda.
Xenophoby, Genocide etc, do not really have to be based on conservativism.

PS: Please dont get me wrong. I am not trying to find sommthing good in the 3rd Reich. In principal all the stuff was only fascade, only the side effects of aramament. But I somehow wanted to bring in this view.

Your points are excellent. Hitler was certainly not in any sense a conservative, just as Stalin was not a liberal. They were both nihilists, propelled by hatred and contempt for anyone and anything that stood in their way - and they simply used whatever was convenient to promote the absolute negation of all that makes like worth living.

[jeraveike]

This article as a whole was reasonably interesting but somewhat narrow and provincial in its perspective (surprising for Der Speigel).

The author's most obvious mistake is confusing neo-conservatism with American conservatism as a whole. This seems to be a misconception shared by the creator of this thread as well - therefore, perhaps I might suggest that European liberals need to know some things about American conservatives as well?

Neo-conservatism promotes a foreign policy comparable to the Democrat's policy of the 1960s, as manifested most obviously by LBJ and the war in Viet Nam. They also promote government spending as a way of paying for that policy - again, just as the Democrats did in the 1960s. Neo-conservatism is only a few years old and will probably prove to be a hothouse plant that flourishes for a few years and then dies; traditional conservatism is part of American history.

This is a surprising oversight. I would suggest that European journalists travel to the US and discuss these issues with many people before writing articles like this. The reference to "common values" can also refer to common traditions, systems of law and education, history, art, literature and family connections. The idea that "common values" MUST refer only to an understanding of the government's role in society is false.

[SaLifHoq]

Why french or german conservatives would in many aspects be liberals in the US and why the neocons just don´t get it...

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/inte...395120,00.html

It seems to me that a European conservative would be called a "complete political asshole" here in America.

[immoceefe]

This article as a whole was reasonably interesting but somewhat narrow and provincial in its perspective (surprising for Der Speigel).

The author's most obvious mistake is confusing neo-conservatism with American conservatism as a whole. This seems to be a misconception shared by the creator of this thread as well - therefore, perhaps I might suggest that European liberals need to know some things about American conservatives as well?

Neo-conservatism promotes a foreign policy comparable to the Democrat's policy of the 1960s, as manifested most obviously by LBJ and the war in Viet Nam. They also promote government spending as a way of paying for that policy - again, just as the Democrats did in the 1960s. Neo-conservatism is only a few years old and will probably prove to be a hothouse plant that flourishes for a few years and then dies; traditional conservatism is part of American history.

This is a surprising oversight. I would suggest that European journalists travel to the US and discuss these issues with many people before writing articles like this. The reference to "common values" can also refer to common traditions, systems of law and education, history, art, literature and family connections. The idea that "common values" MUST refer only to an understanding of the government's role in society is false.

Nice to see you again, Tim. Busy, eh?

Its an interesting question, how much connects us (Europe and the US) and how much divdes us. It comes btw right after the question how much connects and divides us Europeans ourselves.

I do know the US far to less, but even the same question would apply on the US itself too.

Anyway, I think there are substantial differences in the "European values" and the American ones. Just an example, what you might consider freedom and individualism we might consider as bad blunt egoism. Not that Europeans can not be egoistic, but the perception of actions differs.

Alone on environmental issue public opinions differ significantly IMHO.
Take GM foods. No issue in the US as far as I know. In Europe about 70% of all people oppose it. In parts of the EU even so fiercly that you can not even sell GM products in the supermarket cause you do not get any customers.
Well the public opinion about Climatic change is a classic.
Currently I also read about the new Chemicals directive of the EU and that the EU wanted to bring in chemical security as a factor in WTO trades. Of course this were the governments only, but the US strongly intervened against this.
...

This is only a small example of the envirnmental issue, there are many other issues like social welfare, the role of a government, society at a whole etc left.

[Phoneemer]

American Conservatives are well aware of the vastly different culture, values, and priorities of old europe from the U.S., it is the left in this country that need to come to grips with the fact that it is the values, culture, and priorities of the AMERICAN people that they need to represent.

Liberals cite foreign opinion of our leaders as though there is something pure and morally superior to the views of foreign governments and citizens, when in fact, most of the nations and views they cite have far less moral credibility then our own nation.

Nowhere is this more powerfully demonstrated than in liberal's deference to the U.N. as being some sort of moral legitimizer as opposed to a simple forum for discussion and diplomacy. The american people understand that the ONLY country that has our nation's interest as a priority is OUR NATION. The cooperation and approval of other nations is a useful thing to have in the pursuit of our goals, it is not a goal in and off itself.

[DuesTyr]

...most of the nations and views they cite have far less moral credibility then our own nation

I would be cautious when getting into such classifications. Especially if you project them at other free democracies like those in Europe.

Theres the danger of becoming blind due to arrogance.

What I think about the liberal Americans is, that simply many of them can identifiy themselves with views of centred Europeans.

Perhaps you also miss what liberals also share to a certain extend the internationalistic approach many Europeans really honestly have. (I am talking about the people not the politicians).

This internationalism has the perception that the sum is more than its parts. Nationlism denies that. I support the first one, but of course everyone is free to support the latter school of thought, if he is aware of the consequences.

[Vcwdldva]

Nice to see you again, Tim. Busy, eh?

Its an interesting question, how much connects us (Europe and the US) and how much divdes us. It comes btw right after the question how much connects and divides us Europeans ourselves.

I do know the US far to less, but even the same question would apply on the US itself too.

Anyway, I think there are substantial differences in the "European values" and the American ones. Just an example, what you might consider freedom and individualism we might consider as bad blunt egoism. Not that Europeans can not be egoistic, but the perception of actions differs.

Alone on environmental issue public opinions differ significantly IMHO.
Take GM foods. No issue in the US as far as I know. In Europe about 70% of all people oppose it. In parts of the EU even so fiercly that you can not even sell GM products in the supermarket cause you do not get any customers.
Well the public opinion about Climatic change is a classic.
Currently I also read about the new Chemicals directive of the EU and that the EU wanted to bring in chemical security as a factor in WTO trades. Of course this were the governments only, but the US strongly intervened against this.
...

This is only a small example of the envirnmental issue, there are many other issues like social welfare, the role of a government, society at a whole etc left.

Hello Slart - good to see you as well. Yes, I have been very busy.

I quite agree that there is a major difference between American and European perceptions of the individual in relation to society, but I believe the differences are somewhat exaggerated. Americans are more connected to each other than you might assume; certainly not all Americans are extreme individualists. Also, I believe that most large cities, whether American or European, can be very lonely places.

As for GM foods - yes, you are correct, that is not that important here. But environmentalism is a significant and growing issue here. I do not think most Europeans realize this. Also, most opposition to the issue here is NOT because Americans do not care. Rather, there is a distrust and fear of the fanaticism of some environmentalists and their extreme anti-business attitudes. I share that distrust.