I like this

[Cain]

http://www.conservative-resources.com/right-wing-vs-left-wing.html

I know lots of people are going to chime in and possibly disagree with the general statements made in this article, but its actually refreshing to see a website with conservative in the name which:

Doesn't think fascism = communism = liberalism = Hillary Clinton
Admits most modern conservatism is properly called conservative liberalism
Understands the left-right debate in terms of equality versus freedom and that too far in either direction ends up in a terrible way
Calls libertarians by their proper name - aristocrats and oligarchs
Places an emphasis on compromise between freedom and equality, and warns against ideologues.

I also find the addition of theocracy as the final meeting point between the circle of Communism and Fascism as possibly a good one, though I might have to think on it more.

Of course, this explanation does to a degree privilege the centrist liberal position, but I think, being aware of that bias, its still a pretty good description.

[Hoopla]

While disagree with your opinion of Libertarianism, I do agree with you that this site is a very refreshing change from the norm.  More like this site and we may actually be on the road to understanding one another. 

I particularly like this, and think it is very important:

[3] At the heart of the right wing vs left wing debate is a very crucial concept, which many people simply refuse to accept: A society can either be free or equal, but it cannot be both. Certainly, in the center there can be some semblance of compromise, but any such bargain will tend to lean unhappily left or miserably right and human nature is such that even the most temperate, well-balanced state of affairs must inevitably provoke anxiety and discontent.

[Hoopla]

I don't want to go off topic, but I just wanted to say that after reading the bit about Libertarianism more closely I think I understand what he/she means more now.  I can agree to those terms in the context being used.

[Cain]

Yeah.  They seem more focused on the most common usages of the term, and that means Vulgar Libertarianism (which is fair, since socialism and Marxism and fascism get the same treatment).  While there are of course left-libertarians, libertarians in principle, people who call themselves libertarians who are in fact classical liberals or classically liberal in their economics but not in their social views....going by general covention and the schema set out, the usage seems pretty fair.

He discusses what he means by libertarianism in more detail here http://www.conservative-resources.com/definition-of-libertarian.html I don't know if you saw it. 

[Hoopla]

I didn't, thank you.

[fomenter]

i am enjoying these

[Cain]

Hah, he would be a Canadian, too

http://www.conservative-resources.com/aboot.html

ABOOT

[Arafelis]

That's an excellent bit!

My biggest problem right now is the treatment of libertarian socialism.

My biggest problem right now is the endemic traditionalism.  Paradoxically (for certain values of paradox), I don't think he could have written something of that quality if he'd compromised his viewpoint.  But there's an underlying set of assumptions about a sort of stasis in political reality, despite the fact that the last two hundred years or so have been extremely tumultuous in terms of development and innovation on not just theoretical politics and economic models, but actually deployed models.

[Epimetheus]

Understands the left-right debate in terms of equality versus freedom and that too far in either direction ends up in a terrible way

Yes, but anywhere in the middle also ends up in a terrible way.

[fomenter]

That's an excellent bit!

My biggest problem right now is the treatment of libertarian socialism.

My biggest problem right now is the endemic traditionalism.  Paradoxically (for certain values of paradox), I don't think he could have written something of that quality if he'd compromised his viewpoint.  But there's an underlying set of assumptions about a sort of stasis in political reality, despite the fact that the last two hundred years or so have been extremely tumultuous in terms of development and innovation on not just theoretical politics and economic models, but actually deployed models.

lol philosophy students

[East Coast Hustle]

That's an excellent bit!

My biggest problem right now is the treatment of libertarian socialism.

My biggest problem right now is the endemic traditionalism.  Paradoxically (for certain values of paradox), I don't think he could have written something of that quality if he'd compromised his viewpoint.  But there's an underlying set of assumptions about a sort of stasis in political reality, despite the fact that the last two hundred years or so have been extremely tumultuous in terms of development and innovation on not just theoretical politics and economic models, but actually deployed models.

TS;DR.