<p>Liberty University or any other Christian school would be socially conservative. Any expensive private school is very fiscally conservative. What exactly are your political views? Conservativism is too broad.</p>
<p>I wrote this huge reply and was logged out - GRRR it's gone. In brief, my views include the ideas that
-businesses are more profitable, and create more jobs, when they are not hindered by too many taxes and regulations
-people are more generous and socially responsible when they feel personally accountable for the welfare of their fellow man (and do not depend on big, inefficient government agencies to extort and mismanage their generosity)
-government should stay out of people's lives as much as possible, and never limit personal freedoms</p>
<p>I believe in the human spirit, in individuals, and not in bureaucracies. It is really interesting what people think when they see the word "conservative". A true conservative would not fall within the boundary of either major political party, and would most likely be frustrated with both of them.</p>
<p>Some might call me a liberal because I
-am pro-choice
-am a staunch defender of civil liberties
-have high expectations for service to others
-am supportive of alternative lifestyles. </p>
<p>However, those are all truly conservative positions in the classical sense of the term.</p>
<p>In that case, spideygirl, I recommend Dartmouth (check out the Dartmouth Review) and the University of Chicago.</p>
<p>Dartmouth and UC are a little more along the lines of what I was hoping to hear (instead of places like Bob Jones University).</p>
<p>Spidey, no, those are classically liberal points of view. But more to the point, what you've described, as a whole, is not conservative. You are a libertarian. If I had to guess, your absolute favorite candidate this election is Ron Paul. In fact, I don't have to guess, I know it. Unless you're lying, he would have to be.</p>
<p>Actually, arbiter, there is a third option, which is that I don't know anything about Ron Paul. </p>
<p>Those are not classically liberal points of view, they are what liberals like to think of themselves as believing. Also, I think a lot of people call themselves liberals, when really they are conservatives. Conservatives can typically be called libertarian when liberals want to own those humanitarian viewpoints that I described in my last post. </p>
<p>I think of liberal viewpoints as touching on the following:
-the government knows more than smart business people about how their companies should be run
-individuals are not capable of making a lot of important decisions, so government needs to make those decisions for them
-the only way that the underserved will be helped is if government agencies manage the process
-governments should get involved in most details of our personal lives</p>
<p>And also...
-having an abortion is OK because groups of people have pondered and decided that you should be able to make that choice, not because as an individual that right should be inherent in your existence
-civil liberties are great if they are the civil liberties that we like (i.e. free speech is OK for people who agree with us, but not if they don't)
-service to others is a good thing, although I may not truly practice what I preach (even though I live in a 28,000 square foot house, Mother Teresa and I have a lot in common so I should be viewed as a leader in the war on poverty)
-I would like to decide for you how much of your money to give to others, and I would like to decide how that money is spent (or squandered)
-results are not as important as things sounding good, or if they make me feel good when I say them (it doesn't have to work, it just needs to make everyone feel comfortable when they hear it, and sometimes maybe even applaud).</p>
<p>I think of liberals as the mirror image of right-wingers who want to impose their religion and viewpoints on others. It's really the same thing when you think about it. Conservatives trust in individuals, in markets, and not in group-think and governments. </p>
<p>I am not anti-government, I am just against big-government.</p>
<p>I'm with arbiter. The positions spidey articulates are very similar to the ones Dr. Milton Friedman highlighted in his book, Capitalism and Freedom, where he described classical liberalism and its applications to the twentieth century.</p>
<p>Well, I'll look into that but we may be talking about two different things (viewpoints versus politics). I believe in the two-party system. It works. I believe people should stick with the party that suits them the closest and work for change within it. Therefore, I would never vote libertarian.</p>
<p>"I believe in the two-party system. It works."</p>
<p>-I can find boat load of political scientists who disagree....</p>
<p>@ spideygirl, Whether you think that you're a conservative or not, It's highly likely that you'll find a large amount people that have the same views as you in a very liberal campus vs. a conservative one. I personally think you have little in common with many people who view themselves as "conservative."</p>
<p>These terms are all a little undependable, I guess, but that is an interesting point Charisma. I'd be more comfortable at Hamshire than Bob Jones, for example! :-)</p>
<p>I won't bother disputing what you said, as I've long since tired of internet debates on politics, but I will strongly recommend for your own benefit you look into Ron Paul (Assuming you will be old enough to vote come 2008). He's one of the few candidates I'd be okay with winning at the moment.</p>
<p>Conservatives can thrive anywhere. Anne Coulter and Bill Maher went to the same college. And the father of "Intelligent Design Theory" was my torts professor in law school at U.C. Berkeley. </p>
<p>There's a clue there: "Intelligent Design Theory" isn't a scientific theory, it's a (failed) legal strategy. It was a figleaf intended to obscure an attempt to smuggle a discussion of the supernatural into a classrooms dedicated to natural science.</p>
<p>Ron Paul has no shot with the mainstream environment, you guys realize that right?</p>
<p>Wake Forest. And for anyone who doubts intelligent design, think of the English gent who recently got one of his nublies ripped off by his ex-girlfriend. He's got one remaining. That's not intelligent? Think of how many crucial organs we have TWO of. What would be the purpose of that other to give us a second chance in life (for a lot of reasons, but especially after a wacky English bird went wacko on us). God gives us a chance to screw up one lung, kidney, eye, ear, breast, or testicle, and still soldier on. He's quite a good sport, if nothing else.</p>
<p>Really radron? What gives you that idea? Was it the promise to abolish the 16th Amendment (income tax)? Or the UN? MY favorite was his saying he wanted to abolish UNICEF. </p>
<p>And tourguide, I do hope that's a joke. Because you more or less answer your own question/ refute your own point.</p>
<p>I'm with arbiter. Everything you describe about yourself, spidey, lines up with the viewpoints of my Libertarian friends. You might have better luck getting a good opinion if you ask for Libertarian schools. It's all just labels anyway, but if you are going to use one, then it's best to use the most accurate one. Labels change over time, too, as you have mentioned. Conservative used to have a different meaning 50 years ago than it does now. Religion used to not be a big issue in politics. The same constituency who now forms the base of the religious right used to be Democrats, particularly in the southern states where to be a Republican still had the carpetbagger stigma attached to it. Essentially, the word "conservative" implies "not liking change", and the types of people who usually support the conservative party in a country are those who are happy with the status quo. However, this is obviously a very loose definition and doesn't really describe either the Republicans or the Democrats or the Libertarians. What happened, IMO, in the US is that the status quo became very socially liberal and that made the Democratic party the status quo party with regard to social issues. And, the Republicans have lost their fiscal conservativeness by raising taxes and funding an expensive war, not to mention the intrusiveness of the Patriot Act.</p>
<p>Great conservative schools:</p>
<p>Hampden-Sydney College
Washington and Lee
Virginia Military Institute
The Citadel
Hillsdale
University of Dallas
Christendom College
Notre Dame
Davidson
Bucknell
Thomas Aquinus</p>
<p>Pepperdine, if nobody has said it yet.</p>
<p>some of the "less liberal" top 20 schools:</p>
<p>vanderbilt
northwestern
dartmouth
duke
cornell
notre dame
upenn</p>
<p>ones to definitely avoid:
brown
yale
columbia</p>