Opposite of Liberal isn't Conservative.

[Supremereader]

Being Conservative means you want to stick with the ways of the past and use traditonal means to advance society whereas being Liberal means you think it's the governments job to protect and ensure freedom. Infact the opposite of Liberal is Authtoritarian and the opposite of Conservative is Progressive.
I would like to see the politcal compass changed. (Perhaps make it 3D with a Z axis about Conservative - Progessive, X being Socialist - Capitalist and Y being Authoritarian - Liberal)
Also
I'm noticing how difficult it is the be the politcal left on this game while being successful as well as seeing how easy it is to succeed as capitalist and without issue. Don't be bias when it comes to making a game to simulate a political enviroment.

[Cdr Keen]

I am sorry, but your definitions are incorrect as are your scales for what is typical with in the normal political sciences.

Conservatives are people who favor limited government (Federal, State, Local) and less regulation of markets, while attempting to increase social conformity to tradional norms.

Liberals are people who favor a stronger more active government (Federal, State, Local) and approve regulations for business, they have a higher tendency to support social welfare programs, and protecting minority rights.

As for the political compass, most scales see Liberal as the Opposite of Conservative, however these scales use authoritarian vs libertarian as their shifting values (Nolan Chart, UN's ideology cube to name a few)

I should add I agree it can be difficult in the game to play to any extreme; however, it is often the case in of a Democracy to dislike one political extreme being in power for long periods; unless they are able to match the will of the people.

[Professor Hardknocks]

Conservatives: Heavy restrictions on personal choices, person-blame belief system, victim-blame methodology. Big Government on personal choices (marijuana, abortion, smoking, etc.) and small government on businesses and wealth.

Liberals: Heavy restrictions on businesses, and wealth with very few (if any) regulations on Personal Choice. System-blame belief, with special favor to victims. Very few restrictions on personal choices (unless those choices are percieved as toxic to the whole of society).

There is also the Libertarian and Populist:

Libertarian: No government intervention of any kind, government should not exist. If you can't protect yourself, you don't deserve to be safe.

Populist: Will of the people determine everything. If the majority want legal slavery and prostitution, so mote it be.

Then you have Collectivst/Individualist:

Collectivist: The function of social systems is to improve society as a collective, with systems designed to engineer cooperation.

Individualist: The function of social systems is to enhance the individual, with systems designed to engineer conflict.

As you see, the "Left/Right Spectrum" is misunderstood, and the modern definitions are polluted beyond recognition.

If you want to get better at Democracy, try shifting legal policies one step at a time rather than going from one extreme to the next in a sudden move. Another tip, is to think about when you set up your game, how did you set the liberal/conservative scale? If you are a Conservative, and you want an easy game, pick a conservative populace that will be favorable to the type of policies you would personally like. If you want a harder game, make them liberals instead.

Most of all, try not to get hung up. This game isn't trying to create a true representation of Politics. It is just trying to create some basic references, which I think it does quite well.

[Professor Hardknocks]

I should also note that ♥♥♥/Lib produce different tyrannies. You must first understand the difference between Form and Function. Form means outright calling my law to make black people work for free called Slavery. Function without Form is the more common practice, where you create a set of laws that work together to ensure the condition of slavery without actually creating any single thing that can be pointed out as the culprit. Then you can blame slaves for their failures in life and say they deserve to be a slave.

Conservative Tyranny involves Oligopoly, and using monolithic corporate policies to control a populace; that corporations have very little regulation, and don't require any approval or votes to create policies that everyone has to wear pink, or everyone has to agree to get a rectal exam every week. Every company simply adheres to the strictest policy and your choice is to be employed or not be employed.

Liberal Tyranny involves creating "Fairness" in which we are all "treated the same". Often, nobody likes these "fair" policies which involve very little choice and very few options for the end-user.

Tyranny can come from Liberals or Conservatives just the same; each side presents it a little different. I personally think its just a battle of egoism. Rich people are just greedy and selfish so they choose a worldview that cators to that. Poor people are unable to gain wealth in any system without a great deal of luck, fortune, and social capital, so they choose a worldview beneficial to their own situation.

What is tyranny to you, might be liberating to me.

[Supremereader]

Major Mittens a écrit :

I am sorry, but your definitions are incorrect as are your scales for what is typical with in the normal political sciences.

Conservatives are people who favor limited government (Federal, State, Local) and less regulation of markets, while attempting to increase social conformity to tradional norms.

Liberals are people who favor a stronger more active government (Federal, State, Local) and approve regulations for business, they have a higher tendency to support social welfare programs, and protecting minority rights.

Well from what I've seen a lot of people tend to use these terms to describe different things. Honestly Anarchism is one I'd expect to see on the compass instead of Liberal (As there is Law and Order, Taxation and stuff, I'm sure some Anarchists play this game and would prefer that) However from what I've been taught, from friends, from school and from books Liberal does not mean what you've said as most view the worrs Liberal and Liberalism is a foundation of beliefs based on Liberty and in a politcal case, the government and their ability to protect these liberties.

I never bothered to look for a different political compass and am too uneducated to talk about the matter however a simple 2-Dimension axis is far to linear for this game.

Lastly for you Major Mittens, I am not talking about Capitalist, I found it quite easy to be far right in this case, however trying to adopt the far left Socialist economic ideology was far too difficult and was un able to do so. (Center-Left was nice though)

Thadian a écrit :

Conservatives: Heavy restrictions on personal choices, person-blame belief system, victim-blame methodology. Big Government on personal choices (marijuana, abortion, smoking, etc.) and small government on businesses and wealth.

Liberals: Heavy restrictions on businesses, and wealth with very few (if any) regulations on Personal Choice. System-blame belief, with special favor to victims. Very few restrictions on personal choices (unless those choices are percieved as toxic to the whole of society).

...What? No, what you said (for the most part) was being Authoritarian, while you were on spot on about the latter half and the removal of choice it tends to only be in areas which were traditionally monitored historically. (This could of started simply from Religion all the way to mass public opinion)

Now Liberals and the words "Heavy Restriction" should only be mentioned in the same sentance if the words "do not believe in" is inbetween them. Liberals don't think anything of restrictions unless they're on about what you can do in which case they want them gone. Liberals are not an economic ideology, they have no say in Business.

Thadian a écrit :

There is also the Libertarian and Populist:

Libertarian: No government intervention of any kind, government should not exist. If you can't protect yourself, you don't deserve to be safe.

Populist: Will of the people determine everything. If the majority want legal slavery and prostitution, so mote it be.

...Libertarian != Anarchism! Anarchism is the belief in no government. As for populist I have never heard that word before but I'm assuming it's some kind of twisted form of a republic? (Based on a quick few minutes of research populist is what we have right now, with MPs)

Thadian a écrit :

Then you have Collectivst/Individualist:

Collectivist: The function of social systems is to improve society as a collective, with systems designed to engineer cooperation.

Individualist: The function of social systems is to enhance the individual, with systems designed to engineer conflict.

As you see, the "Left/Right Spectrum" is misunderstood, and the modern definitions are polluted beyond recognition.

So... the left side and the right side, which for the purpose of description to less informed people we use Socialist and Capitialist respectively? (I'm not sure what your point is here)

Thadian a écrit :

If you want to get better at Democracy, try shifting legal policies one step at a time rather than going from one extreme to the next in a sudden move. Another tip, is to think about when you set up your game, how did you set the liberal/conservative scale? If you are a Conservative, and you want an easy game, pick a conservative populace that will be favorable to the type of policies you would personally like. If you want a harder game, make them liberals instead.

Most of all, try not to get hung up. This game isn't trying to create a true representation of Politics. It is just trying to create some basic references, which I think it does quite well.

I didn't say I wanted to get better, it's not a hard game. What I'm saying is that trying to get the Socialist Paradise achievement is too hard whereas the one for being Far right and Capitialist is way too easy.

I never said it was or it wasn't! I just simply think if you're going to make a game that has something along the lines of "Do you think you could run a country" without adding a sarcastic comment or something like that, that you'd expect this is a simulator that's built accurately. After all, Kerbal Space Program added little green people and funny comments throughout the solar system, it's a fun space simulation game but it doesn't have to be exactly like real space travel because it's made sarcastically!

Thadian a écrit :

I should also note that ♥♥♥/Lib produce different tyrannies. You must first understand the difference between Form and Function. Form means outright calling my law to make black people work for free called Slavery. Function without Form is the more common practice, where you create a set of laws that work together to ensure the condition of slavery without actually creating any single thing that can be pointed out as the culprit. Then you can blame slaves for their failures in life and say they deserve to be a slave.

Conservative Tyranny involves Oligopoly, and using monolithic corporate policies to control a populace; that corporations have very little regulation, and don't require any approval or votes to create policies that everyone has to wear pink, or everyone has to agree to get a rectal exam every week. Every company simply adheres to the strictest policy and your choice is to be employed or not be employed.

Liberal Tyranny involves creating "Fairness" in which we are all "treated the same". Often, nobody likes these "fair" policies which involve very little choice and very few options for the end-user.

Tyranny can come from Liberals or Conservatives just the same; each side presents it a little different. I personally think its just a battle of egoism. Rich people are just greedy and selfish so they choose a worldview that cators to that. Poor people are unable to gain wealth in any system without a great deal of luck, fortune, and social capital, so they choose a worldview beneficial to their own situation.

What is tyranny to you, might be liberating to me.

And your point is? Like I said, Liberal and Conservative are not polar. You can be Liberal and Conservative, the opposite of Liberal is Authoritarian (or Anarchism, it depends on which you prefer to see)

[Aedile]

Major Mittens a écrit :

I am sorry, but your definitions are incorrect as are your scales for what is typical with in the normal political sciences.

Conservatives are people who favor limited government (Federal, State, Local) and less regulation of markets, while attempting to increase social conformity to tradional norms.

Liberals are people who favor a stronger more active government (Federal, State, Local) and approve regulations for business, they have a higher tendency to support social welfare programs, and protecting minority rights.

As for the political compass, most scales see Liberal as the Opposite of Conservative, however these scales use authoritarian vs libertarian as their shifting values (Nolan Chart, UN's ideology cube to name a few)

I should add I agree it can be difficult in the game to play to any extreme; however, it is often the case in of a Democracy to dislike one political extreme being in power for long periods; unless they are able to match the will of the people.

There are two dimensions to liberalism - economic and personal.
The american neocon is generally economic liberal.
The american "liberal" would generally be some type personal liberal (but more often people who lean left ar called liberals for some unknown reason.)

In the traditional sense of the word, conservative is the the tradition, law and order type. Can be socialist, or capitalist all the same. Can be religious or atheist. It's not about the ends, it's the means.

The liberal, is the liberty guy, including the liberty to carry a gun, raise your children as you see fit (and send them to private school if you wanted), speak freely (even if someone does not like it), drink, smoke, and above all believe in what you want.

Most people won't clearly fit in one of the categories, and in fact "the west" is rather liberal, as democracy is generally a liberal form of gevernment, and market economy is generally liberal economy.

Conservatives and liberals are not polar opposites, and most pople would take different stance on different issues, one could be liberal, and the other concervative. Liberals generally have no problem forbidding other people's liberties, if they feel they encroach on their own. Very easily you can be liberal about your own liberties. Remember those guys which brought smoking ban in pubs, so they can drink in pease?

A person could easily be liberal, but in any case these liberties often might need to be protected. So one could easily push "liberal values" with conservative means. Political correctess is great example of this.


I cannot say what is opposite of conservatism. It's not progressive as a lot of progressive countries in history go to through the process of reshaping the country with rather conservative methods.

"The political compass" (not in game), compares economic and personal (political) freedeom. Problem of course is in democracy you can't go really far to the athoritarian, or you won't be a democracy anymore

[Supremereader]

Aedile a écrit :

Major Mittens a écrit :

I am sorry, but your definitions are incorrect as are your scales for what is typical with in the normal political sciences.

Conservatives are people who favor limited government (Federal, State, Local) and less regulation of markets, while attempting to increase social conformity to tradional norms.

Liberals are people who favor a stronger more active government (Federal, State, Local) and approve regulations for business, they have a higher tendency to support social welfare programs, and protecting minority rights.

As for the political compass, most scales see Liberal as the Opposite of Conservative, however these scales use authoritarian vs libertarian as their shifting values (Nolan Chart, UN's ideology cube to name a few)

I should add I agree it can be difficult in the game to play to any extreme; however, it is often the case in of a Democracy to dislike one political extreme being in power for long periods; unless they are able to match the will of the people.

There are two dimensions to liberalism - economic and personal.
The american neocon is generally economic liberal.
The american "liberal" would generally be some type personal liberal (but more often people who lean left ar called liberals for some unknown reason.)

In the traditional sense of the word, conservative is the the tradition, law and order type. Can be socialist, or capitalist all the same. Can be religious or atheist. It's not about the ends, it's the means.

The liberal, is the liberty guy, including the liberty to carry a gun, raise your children as you see fit (and send them to private school if you wanted), speak freely (even if someone does not like it), drink, smoke, and above all believe in what you want.

Most people won't clearly fit in one of the categories, and in fact "the west" is rather liberal, as democracy is generally a liberal form of gevernment, and market economy is generally liberal economy.

Conservatives and liberals are not polar opposites, and most pople would take different stance on different issues, one could be liberal, and the other concervative. Liberals generally have no problem forbidding other people's liberties, if they feel they encroach on their own. Very easily you can be liberal about your own liberties. Remember those guys which brought smoking ban in pubs, so they can drink in pease?

A person could easily be liberal, but in any case these liberties often might need to be protected. So one could easily push "liberal values" with conservative means. Political correctess is great example of this.


I cannot say what is opposite of conservatism. It's not progressive as a lot of progressive countries in history go to through the process of reshaping the country with rather conservative methods.

"The political compass" (not in game), compares economic and personal (political) freedeom. Problem of course is in democracy you can't go really far to the athoritarian, or you won't be a democracy anymore

I learned something, looked it up, it was true on every reliably source I could find.

However you did seem to have a kind of leniancy to describe Liberal is private sector when if you're a Libertarian who is Economically Socailist then you are all about State ownership of most things. Also not all Liberals (like me) are for ownership of guns, mainly because I already live in a country where they are banned.

[cliffski]

The debate on this topic is complicated because the word 'liberal' means different things to Americans and Europeans. The usage in the game (which is made by me, a British developer), is actually closer to what Americans tend to call Libertarian, as in interested in individual freedom, so against state surveillance, and with a very 'live and let live' attitude to what people do with their lives in terms of abortion, same-sex relationships, drug use etc.

[Non-Slim Jim]

In that case, would conservatives then really be the opposite of liberals in the game, being opposed to such attitudes and preferring less individual freedom and more government controls?

[Supremereader]

cliffski a écrit :

The debate on this topic is complicated because the word 'liberal' means different things to Americans and Europeans. The usage in the game (which is made by me, a British developer), is actually closer to what Americans tend to call Libertarian, as in interested in individual freedom, so against state surveillance, and with a very 'live and let live' attitude to what people do with their lives in terms of abortion, same-sex relationships, drug use etc.

So why is conservative at the top? Surely Authoritarian should be then? (Brit here too)

Testecakes a écrit :

In that case, would conservatives then really be the opposite of liberals in the game, being opposed to such attitudes and preferring less individual freedom and more government controls?

No the conservatives do not believe in the opposite of Liberals, they simply think that the state should have a larger choice on what you say and do.

And now I realise I'm contradicting myself. I see Cliffski's reasoning.