DoomYoshi wrote:f*ck today. If John Stuart Mill wouldn't recognize it as liberal, it's not liberal. How can you trust any definition not given to you by a rich, dead, white male?
I guess I better clarify that any political philosophy which does not assume that the greatest goal is minimum government is not liberalism. Nor is it worthy of being called philosophy, but that's another story.
Ohhh, yeah, now I understand. Yeah, the 'liberals' of today aren't really liberals. They're some Rawlsian "modern liberal" (even if they don't know it, much of today's liberal very much resembles his ideas/arguments), but the modern liberal really isn't a liberal. They're a warm, fuzzy version of a state socialist.