Huh. We're starting to go in circles now. By your own definition, Paul isn't a libertarian.
Remember what you wrote a few days ago (we've already covered Paul's position on taxes, in case you forget)?
Do you want limited taxation? Then you are a social liberal. Do you want no taxation at all? Then you are a libertarian.
The portion of my post which you've snipped off contained a handful of other examples that proves labeling people with specific ideologies is inaccurate.
Once again, labeling is for census takers and political parties.
You should not let yourself be boxed by labels.
The world isn't conveniently divided between neatly labeled groups of people; we're not players for a sports team.
I meant no disrespect in snipping off your post, it was so much information that it would bloat my post.
I still think we got your message. (no need to quote a list of "4 libertarians that aren't really libertarians")
"Limited taxation" have different meanings obviously, Ron Paul wants less taxation than Obama.
And Obama wants limited taxes. (if you compare it to European standards)
I realize that my example was very bad, I apologize for that.
I never said anything about limiting yourselves to one label. I'm just against people calling themselves "apolitical".
And the usual "I am better than everyone else because I don't belong to any ideology"
You can't pin everything on the 'social democracy' bogeyman, dude.
The definition of left and right in U.S. and Europe is different - it's as simple as that. They inhabit different areas of the political spectrum.
If you are going to peg some historical or traditional aspect of social democracy to the issue (which still doesn't change their differences, btw), then what about the U.S' own socialist policies?
Do you realize that the greatest ever economic development policy in the history of the United States is also the most socialist in the history of the United States?
Lincoln's Homestead Act.
Little House on the Prairie, anyone?
The federal government offered citizens (and even advertised in far flung regions of Europe) free land and zero interest loans for farming tools, seeds and fertilizers, payable after harvest. It become the single most powerful source of economic growth in the history of the United States. And yet, the descendants of the main beneficiaries of the Act today are among the most vociferous critics of socialism. Going by your theory, the American right wing should look a whole lotta different today.
And to make things more interesting, another of Lincoln's influential policy, the Civil War Pension program, tied the military to the Republicans for almost a century. And yet, in the last presidential election, Paul had the lion's share of support from military personnel. Another damper on your theory.
Look, at this stage, I know my words won''t change your mind. But keep an open mind, and don't create unnecessary internal barriers.
We can discuss European and American politics for years and still not understand it completely. Europe and America is very different let's just leave it at that.
I have a open mind, and I don't have any internal barriers. I just don't like people saying they don't follow any ideology at all.