AIUI,

Liberals want more restrictions on business and less on individuals.

Conservatives want more restrictions on individuals and less on business.

Libertarians want less restrictions on business and individuals.

Authoritarians want more restriction on business and individuals.

Those are excellent definitions in the abstract.

But hiding behind all those labels are the interests of the individual. The real battle over the last 27 years has been between those who believe that more inequality is a good thing and those who believe that more equality is a good thing. The former group does not dare speak this view in public, but since it naturally gravitates towards business & property, it is full of people who are skilled in advertising, so it lies its ass off. And it's won overwhelmingly.

Sometimes a crack shows in the anti-equality armor. During the early Reagan era I found a book by a Christian conservative backing far-right policies, but also arguing that taxes should be LOWER on rich people than poor people because the rich are clearly superior decision-makers and thus their spending is good for the economy and the spending of inferiors is bad for the economy. Now that is grotesque. But look at the subsequent effort by the Right, both "conservative" and "libertarian", to bring about exactly this state of affairs. They have moved heaven and earth to convince the ordinary American that his well-being entirely depends on the upper several % of citizens getting power over everything that matters.

Now to me the interesting division is between those who feel that capitalism is properly concentrating wealth and power in the hands of the "right" people, and those supporters of inequality who are shocked to discover that capitalism concentrates wealth and power in the hands of those they consider subhuman: Jewish bankers, black rappers, gay actors, etc, etc. That latter group is the dirty secret of American politics. They worship property as long as they have enough that they can piss on some lower caste. They assume that God is the Invisible Hand of the marketplace, ergo if they worship Him and persecute His enemies they will magically get nicer houses than Jews. And when they find that they are on the wrong end of the wealth-polarization process, they have no rational place to turn their wrath.

Yeah, Germany had 'em too.

Since many of these bullies are natural cops, prison guards and soldiers, it's natural that their version of capitalism supports gigantic military budgets, Patriot Acts and Duke Cunninghams. How else do they elevate themselves to their proper place over those faggy Harvard MBAs?

So yeah, Bush's less-affluent supporters are authoritarians, but it's important to see why. And why they're pouring their spare cash into an institution that violates all separation between Church, State and Business: the evangelical Protestant movement. The Falwells and Robertsons can re-define the failure of capitalism to raise the incomes of "good" Americans as actually being caused by a moral perversion of urban liberal elites - exactly Hitler's tack. Since a religion does not have to reward its average follower with rewards in this lifetime, these holy bastards can continue the polarization of American wealth, make fortunes on Wall Street, and then turn the rage of their impoverished followers on scapegoats, first at home, then abroad. You can make your own guess on how peak oil will amplify this.

This will not end in 2008.

It's way more complex than that. [US Only] Consider, why is Tom Friedman a liberal? Why is Hillary a liberal? Saying they want more restrictions on business and less on individuals is just wrong. And obviously so. "Liberalism" is a free market creed based on growth - in particular, that a rising tide (economic growth) will improve everyone's lot so there is no need to address distribution. There are those who think liberalism means pluralism; that's about the same as having Wal-Mart in your *local* Chamber of Commerce, and somehow thinking that, gee, what a nice ally....

Conservatives are either close to extinct or co-opted by the thugs ala Wal-Mart above. Given the triumph of economic liberalism and its adoption by what most people consider the conservative movement, it's hard to find a distinct thread. I'd hazard a guess that the Green Party, as in the sense of the European Greens, is probable the heir to this. But that will take the die-off of a generation that still thinks the Republicans represent their cause. John Dean writes about conservatives in several books - quite good books. Lakoff discusses the conservative personality in his fat book, Moral Politics; that's a good resource too, not his poppy shorter books.

There are analyses that show that libertarians aren't a true species. After all, what does one make of an anarchist that submits to authority when it make sense? They are really authoritarians in disguise.

Nor do authoritarians want more restrictions on business and individuals. It depends on the WHO gets restricted and on who gets to decide - chain of command, class, "the best people". A better distinction might be "rule of law" or "rule of man". A little story: I'm one of the people on the complaint list in Maine taking Verizon to court for wiretapping illegally with NSA - something President Bush has admitted is illegal but says he will continue anyway. The defense, by the US DOJ, is nothing but an affidavit from General Alexander, head of NSA, that there is nothing illegal. Never mind that the President admits it is illegal, the DOJ advanced that defense and the court - also a Bush appointee - accepted it. Authoritarianism.

Authoritarianism is much more than that. Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor is a good place to start. Or Catch-22 if you want to go at it from the other side. Just remember, when people are fearful, they seek authority.

cfm in Gray, ME

On issues of Justice:
A Liberal is a Conservative who has been arrested.

A Conservative is a Liberal who has been mugged.

On issues of taxation and profit:

As George Will once said, "America is a system that privatizes gains but socializes risk". If I hit it big, I keep the money. If I lose big, the public shares the loss.
"In America, everyone wants lower taxes, but everyone wants the benefits of government spending and programs. In this respect, all Americans are half Conservative." George Will.

Roger Conner jr.
Remember we are only one cubic mile from freedom

That's just bollox posing as political analysis

--
When no-one around you understands
start your own revolution
and cut out the middle man