:::::No, the unborn ''are a group of people.'' Genocide is still genocide if the people in question are unborn, homosexual, or Jews. It doesn't have to be ethnic. Genocide can still be included here. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 22:20, 8 May 2017 (EDT)
== Authoritarianism is not a synonym for liberalism. Not all authoritarian drill instuctors are liberals for example . Francisco Franco was not a liberal. Liberal is not synonymous with dictator ==
Authoritarianism is not a synonym for liberalism. Not all very authoritarian drill instructors are liberals for example,
Some conservative principals in schools can be authoritarian. So authoritarianism is not synonymous with liberalism. [[Francisco Franco]], a dictator, was not a liberal. In some ways, he was traditional for example. Conservapedia's article says he was supported by the Catholic church. Liberal is not synonymous with dictator. I removed the claim that Franco was a liberal. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 1902:4050, 8 9 May 2017 (EDT)
== Denmark/Sweden/France/California are not Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union. Stop pretending that liberalism equals fascism or communism ==
:::You're missing my point. Liberalism and fascism/communism are the same in many ways (atheism, labor, one-world government, anti-family, government control in the lives of people for communism; big government, animal "rights," environmentalism, gun control, socialism with the Nazis). These are liberals, but more extreme versions of them. They are liberals nonetheless. Also, let's not make library book the final authority, as liberals obviously don't want to call nazism and communism liberalism. Let's look at their policies and ''not'' what the mainstream thinks of them. Their policies were left-wing. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:42, 8 May 2017 (EDT)
::::The secular left is made up of atheists/agnostics. The Soviet Union and communism is militant atheism. Not agnosticism or "militant agnosticism".
::::Communism and fascism are was not well known for animal rights. When I think of the Soviet Union or Chinese communism or the Russians, animal rights activism does not spring to mind.
::::The environmental record for communism is very poor compared to liberalism. If you haven't done any research on this matterFor example, please do soread the article [http://thefederalist.com/2014/01/13/if-you-think-communism-is-bad-for-people-check-out-what-it-did-to-the-environment/ If You Think Communism Is Bad For People, Check Out What It Did To The Environment]. Germany is fairly liberal, has a high standard of living, produces many things and does a lot of exporting. But its record in terms of the environment is far better than most, if not all, communist countries.
::::This may be correct and I have not thoroughly researched it, "The Nazis ordered soldiers to plant more trees. They were the first Europeans to establish nature reserves and order the protection of hedgerows and other wildlife habitats. And they were horrified at the idea of hydroelectric dams on the Rhine. Adolf Hitler and other leading Nazis were vegetarian and they passed numerous laws on animal rights."[http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/ecology/nazi_ecology.htm] But conservation is different from environmentalism so I am not sure how fair it is to say that Nazism practiced environmentalism in terms of its ideology. See: [[Conservation vs. environmentalism]] The bottom line though is you have to explain things. Not just bury them in footnotes with a few words. You will destroy any shred of credibility the article has if you do this. I did clean up some ridiculous claims like Attila the Hun being a liberal. ::::European social democracies which are liberal are different from communist countries. People can do open air preaching in many /all liberal countries in Europe. You cannot do that in communist countries.
::::There is a political spectrum.
::::You can certainly have a section in the article on the more extreme liberals and clearly mark it as such, but be sure to cite legitimate examples and clearly explain it. Specifically, clearly explain things and don't bury them in the footnotes. Don't just have two words if people are not commonly aware of a matter. Not everyone who reads the article is a hard core conservative or is very informed about politics. For example, Anita Dunn, who was Obama's debate coach and who served as White House Communications Director from April through November 2009, named Mao as her favorite political philosopher.[http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2012/10/17/obama-debate-advisor-anita-dunn-mao/] That is a legitimate point to make as far as far left liberals.
::::And let's do use the entire world's libraries for decades and decades and decades and use the world's printed encyclopedias and not pretend they don't exist for the sake of ideological fantasizing. Liberalism is not Nazism or communism.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:30, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
I updated the article and documented the communists moving closer to capitalism and the American liberals being more sympathetic to communism. I also created a [[liberal intolerance]] section of the article and near the lead of the article I put how liberals were limiting free speech. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:51, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
== Democrat does not equal liberal. Historically, many Democrats have not been liberals. Not all American slave owners were liberal. George Washington owned slaves. ==
:Go ahead. Makes sense. Obama is largely yesterday's news. So is Hillary Clinton. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:41, 8 May 2017 (EDT)
::Good. I'll try to find a picture of her with a booger hanging out of her nose. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''The coup plotters won, for now'']]</sup> 23:44, 8 May 2017 (EDT)
== The truth hurts. Fabrications and political fantasizing doesn't. Keep the article free from nonsense ==
I cleaned up the article.
Before I cleaned up the article, it had a significant amount of nonsense like:
- [[Attila the Hun]] being a liberal.
- [[Francisco Franco]] being a liberal.
- Trying to make communism/fascism synonymous with liberalism.
There appears to be a strong desire to make liberalism worse than it already is. Please resists this temptation. The truth hurts, but fabrications and political fantasizing do not. Please keep the article free from nonsense.
I have created some articles that have made liberals very angry. The articles are very popular and some have received hundreds of thousands of views. I endeavored to make the articles truthful and well-supported. I used plenty of footnotes. I repeatedly asked liberals to point out factual errors in the articles. Please use the same amount of due diligence in this article.
And if you make a claim in the article. Adequately explain it. Do not make some big and bold claim that most people are not aware of and think a footnote is going to cut it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 02:40, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
== Liberal intolerance article greatly needs expansion - especially in light of recent events ==
The [[liberal intolerance]] article greatly needs to be expanded - especially in light of things that have happened since Trump appeared as a political candidate and was elected (violent demonstrations, violence used to prevent speakers on campuses, etc. etc.). Right now, the [[liberal intolerance]] article is merely one sentence.
If the [[Liberal intolerance]] article was expanded, the [[liberal]] article could have a section on liberal intolerance.
The liberal article is a popular article. But it turned into a mess and I cleaned it up as I indicated on the talk page.
The liberal article could be much better. Modern liberalism is often intolerant of conservatives/conservatism. The way the [[liberal]] article was trying to make this point was poorly done. Slapping the word Stalinism, etc. on the article doesn't cut the mustard. A section on liberal intolerance with a link to a well-supported article would cut the mustard. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 03:11, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
:I started the article.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 06:53, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
::In that article what's needed is not just a laundry list of instances, but an in depth anaylsis as to what basic beliefs liberals hold that they feel justify censoring, silencing, intimidating, harassing, lawbreaking, using acts of violence up to and including extermination againsts persons they deem non-liberal. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''The coup plotters won, for now'']]</sup> 16:34, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
:::RobS, Go for it!!!! It could be a very informative and popular article if it was done right. If it was helpful to readers, you could have a very small section of examples which gave a link to a separate article giving a laundry list such as [[Examples of liberal intolerance]]). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:39, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
== Liberalism and communism ==
It might be a good idea to consider adding this to the article: [http://www.breitbart.com/california/2017/05/09/california-may-allow-communists-work-openly-state-government/ the California State Assembly passed a bill to allow communists to openly work in government positions]. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 18:29, 9 May 2017 (EDT)