Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (17128)	7/11/2002 5:44:40 AM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

That would the libertarian part. Not being socially conservative is the left part. If the absence of social conservative views qualifies one as left wing, I suppose that the label would apply to me, as it would to a whole lot of others who would be most surprised to find themselves classified as such. I was thinking of the irony of these labels earlier, in the context of foreign policy. Many of us feel that military force should only be used as a last resort, to confront critical problems that can be resolved no other way. We dislike the idea of unilateral military action, and seek to shed the cowboy image. If one accepts traditional definitions, this is an archetypally "conservative" position: cautious, moderate, risk-averse. Those who define themselves as "conservatives" seem to be lining up on the other side of that particular fence. Once again, the labels prove awkward. It would be hard to apply the adjective "conservative" to, say, a Wolfowitz or a Perle with a straight face, if one thinks about what the word actually means.