> _People who call themselves realists are often just dreamers who gottheir hearts broken somewhere along the way._
>
> -- [Ashley Stahl/TEDx talk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRtBHF-WPpM)
>"People who call themselves realists are often just dreamers who gottheir hearts broken somewhere along the way."
This reminds me of another quote in a different context:
"Conservatives are liberals who've been mugged."
Usually said by conservatives who consider themselves to be realists.
@Pat Oooh, this wakes up so many thoughts. Very good shot there! Thanks!
I am sure this would instigate a "culture war", but I also truly believe that conservatism is primarily about fear.
Says somebody mostly voting for "center-right" in my geography 🙂
@freemo Well, we can argue about nitty-gritty semantics here, but I think you;ve got the definition "liberal" wrong. Liberal, in my book has not much to do with right vs. left. It rather is about _freedom_.
_Conservative_, in my world, has the opposite in _progressive_. Which to me screams "embrace the change", or "do what _currently_ is the right the to do". In other words, _don't be afraid to step into the future!_
semantic arguments are boring. The definition of liberal you just gave I would call either classically liberal or libertarian. When I see liberal used on its own I see it as synonomous with the left and if a word is needed to be a bit more granular then liberal = neo-liberal.
That said semantics are stupid. Lets just replace the words I used with democrat and republican so there is no problem with quibbling over definitions.
@freemo @FailForward
>This is pretty much the same mechanics as the euphemism treadmill, and I agree.
Yep, very much. Words naturally change meaning over time because of gradual misunderstanding or whatever, but in politics, it's rapid and intentional.