Tea Party Founder: It's Over

[courts]

It never began.

This. It was just the conservative movement flexing its muscles under a different name.

you mean "conservative" movement. as has been pointed out even by a lot of leftists by now on forum "conservatism" in the us doesn't really exist. it's more of a vague umbrella term for anyone that isn't a social democrat than an actual ideology.

[courts]

It never began.

This. It was just the conservative movement flexing its muscles under a different name.

you mean "conservative" movement. as has been pointed out even by a lot of leftists by now on forum "conservatism" in the us doesn't really exist. it's more of a vague umbrella term for anyone that isn't a social democrat than an actual ideology.

It is ironic that while you guys are legitimately pointing out flaws in the traditional definition of "conservatism", you do so by relying on a completely absurd definition of "social democracy".

But anyway, I agree with what you meant.

there's a distinction between people believing in 'social democracy' and the us actually being a functional social democracy. i never claimed it was. but is it really going too far to characterize the average american progressive as a social democrat?

[courts]

It never began.

This. It was just the conservative movement flexing its muscles under a different name.

you mean "conservative" movement. as has been pointed out even by a lot of leftists by now on forum "conservatism" in the us doesn't really exist. it's more of a vague umbrella term for anyone that isn't a social democrat than an actual ideology.

It is ironic that while you guys are legitimately pointing out flaws in the traditional definition of "conservatism", you do so by relying on a completely absurd definition of "social democracy".

But anyway, I agree with what you meant.

there's a distinction between people believing in 'social democracy' and the us actually being a functional social democracy. i never claimed it was. but is it really going too far to characterize the average american progressive as a social democrat?

Yes. It's going much too far.

I would argue that there are very few actual Social Democrats in America, and that all of them are placed too much to the left of the mainstream to ever meet success at the national level. I would add that, to a lesser extent, this is increasingly true in all of the Western world.

what would you have as your criteria? is it the comparative lack of support for outright nationalizing things or a dole? that doesn't seem like a huge ideological difference.