I'll bet everyone is reading this silly entry now. :D
I was scampering around LJ when I came across the following statement:
(Politically I'm actually on the border between moderate/liberal, and fairly steeped in libertarianist idealogy)
I completely understand what nina_anilina means, so don't bother affecting that I don't. :P That being said, if you observe the statement from the literal (semantic) level, it doesn't make much sense.
Taking it from the top, what the hell is a border of an idealogy? Big checkpoints with armed idea gaurds on the Greater Plane of Philosophy, who check your psych-baggage to make sure you aren't harboring any fallacies? (I imagine that would be one heck of a job.)
Next we find this supposed border is between moderate and... liberal. So, what's the other side of Liberalism? What's being moderated between? Communism? Fascism? Nazism? Authoritarianism? What? In any case, this supposed person would only believe in some freedom, which is not liberal at all. "Conservatism, you slobbering semantic-searching simpleton!" somebody eventually says. Okay, then, but what is "Conservatism"? Well, the belief of conserving things, duh. But conserving what? See, this is an entirely relative term, and not really a belief at all. In the U.S., we have a higly Liberal background; that's what the United States was idealogically founded upon, argueably. So, a U.S. conservative would be... a... Liberal. Confused yet?
But wait! There's more!
Finally, we get to the part about Libertarianism, who I will assert are classic Liberals with a few 'crusading' purfication-type economic policies. (I know that's too simplistic; just roll with it for a minute.) The phrase "fairly steeped" is like a yo-yo: "TO THE EXTREME, but only a little bit."
So, after processing all of this, we end up with:
"I'm waffling between Liberalism and Liberalism, with a background in New-Age Retro Liberalism."
To which I reply, "What."