To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
Languages
Recent
Show all languages
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

League of Free Liberals

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

League of Free Liberals
Bond van Vrije Liberalen
ChairpersonMeinard Tydeman (1906–1916)
Alibert Cornelis Visser van IJzendoorn (1916-1921)
FoundedJune 23, 1906 (1906-06-23)
DissolvedApril 16, 1921 (1921-04-16)
Preceded byFree liberals
Succeeded byLiberal State Party
IdeologyClassical liberalism
Night-watchman state[1]
Colors  Black (logo)
  Blue (customary)

The League of Free Liberals (Dutch: Bond van Vrije Liberalen) was a Dutch classical liberal political party and a predecessor of the Liberal State Party which is historically linked to the People's Party for Freedom and Democracy, the major Dutch liberal party. The party's name League of Free Liberals was supposed to convey that the party was not a classical political party, with party discipline and a centralised organisation but a league of independent MPs. The conservative liberals were called free liberals before they had founded a separate party.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    Views:
    1 589 496
    6 512
    2 572 478
    25 667
    6 462
  • Who Are the Racists: Conservatives or Liberals?
  • Liberal Reforms - Cartoon Analysis (Sources A & B - Why did the Liberals introduce the reforms?)
  • College Made Me a Conservative
  • A Day in the Life: University of Pennsylvania Student
  • Big Questions Ep. 23: Middlebury College

Transcription

Hardly a day goes by that someone of prominence -- a politician, a talk show host, an entertainer -- doesn't call some conservative -- or Conservatives generally -- racist. Here are typical examples: The Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Congressman Steve Israel: "To a significant extent, [conservatives] are animated by racism." TV newscaster Ed Schultz: "This is what the Republican Party stands for. . . : racism." Oprah Winfrey: "There's a level of disrespect for the office that occurs in some cases and maybe even many cases because [the President is] African American. There's no question about that. " To call someone a racist should be a very serious matter. A racist is a person who believes that one race is inherently superior or inferior to another. It's not intelligence or goodness that determines an individual's worth; it's his or her skin color. To say that racism is foolish and stupid -- not to mention evil -- is to understate the case. But, according to many of their critics, conservatives are that stupid and that evil. But, with few exceptions, conservatives are neither. So why is the charge even made? The answer is primarily political: to maintain black support for liberals and liberal policies. To back up this charge, the accusers point to conservative policies. So let's examine some conservative policies to see if they are, indeed, racist. The longstanding conservative opposition to Affirmative Action is a good place to start. It was Democratic President, John F. Kennedy, who first used the term "affirmative action" in 1961. But Affirmative Action, in the way we think of it now, wasn't implemented until 1970, during the Administration of a Republican President, Richard Nixon. The theory was that, because of historical discrimination, blacks were at a competitive disadvantage to other races and ethnicities. To erase that disadvantage, standards that most blacks presumably couldn't meet had to be lowered. One could make the case that this policy had some utility when it was first put in place. But that was a long time ago. The conservative position is that blacks have repeatedly proven they can compete with anyone without the benefits -- demeaning benefits, I might add -- of lower standards. There are countless examples of black success in every field at every level. The policy is no longer necessary. But the conservative argument goes further. Study after study shows that, in the case of college admissions, Affirmative Action actually hurts many blacks. By lowering admissions standards for blacks (and some other minority students), colleges set many of these students up for failure. They get placed in schools for which they're not prepared. And high black dropout rates confirm this view. So does common sense. If white students with mediocre SAT scores were admitted to Ivy League schools, they, too, would be set up to fail. Let's do the math: Conservatives believe that blacks and other minorities are every bit as capable as whites of succeeding as policemen, firemen, businessmen, lawyers, doctors, politicians, and college students. Yet, for this belief conservatives are called racist. The irony, of course, is that those who accuse conservatives of being racist believe that blacks and other minorities are not as capable as whites of succeeding and therefore still need Affirmative Action, almost a half century after it was first implemented. Let's look at another issue where this contrast between conservatives and those who accuse them of being racist is even more starkly drawn -- Voter ID. Conservatives say that America should require that every voter present an ID when he or she votes, just as European countries do in order to help keep their elections honest. Are all these democracies racist? Of course not. Yet, the accusers say that conservatives who support Voter ID are racist. Why do they say this? Because, they argue, it's really a ruse to prevent blacks and minorities from voting, since many of them just aren't capable of acquiring an ID. Can you get more condescending than that? Let's be real. You need an ID to drive, to fly, to buy a beer, even to purchase some cold medicines. Whites can do it, but blacks can't? Tell me who the racists are again? One more example: it's conservatives who push for school vouchers, which would allow all parents, not just wealthy ones, to choose their children's school. It's the other side that doesn't trust minority parents to select an appropriate school for their children. Why aren't the people who compel black children to stay in terrible schools the racists? At some point, maybe you'll start asking yourself, like I did: Who's really obsessed with race? And whose policies really hurt blacks and minorities? Maybe it's not who you think it is. I'm Derryck Green of Project 21 for Prager University.

History

Joan Röell, Prime Minister from 1894 to 1897.
Samuel van Houten, Minister of the Interior from 1894 to 1897.

The League of Free Liberals was the first official organisation of old, free or conservative liberals, who had been elected on individual tickets since the 1870s. They held a considerable number of seats in the late 1880s and 1890s. The conservative classical liberals were opposed to the progressive politics of liberal politicians like Kappeyne van de Coppello. After the 1877 elections the first signs of a real conservative tendency were visible. They were led by Gleichman and where therefore called Gleichmannians, as opposed to Kappeynians (who supported Kappeyne van de Coppello). In 1885 however all liberals united in the Liberal Union.

In 1894 the conflict between the progressive and conservative or classically liberal tendencies heated over the proposed relaxation of the census. A group of prominent conservative liberals left the Liberal Union. They lacked real leadership, they had no official chairman for their parliamentary party in the House of Representatives. Instead charismatic politicians gathered like-minded MPs around them. After the 1894 elections many classical and conservative liberals were represented in the cabinet, led by the liberal conservative Roëll. The conservative liberals had good relations with the Liberal Union and two political groups cooperated in many electoral districts and some prominent conservative liberals were minister in progressive liberal governments, like De Beaufort, who served as minister of Foreign Affairs in cabinet led by Van Tienhoven (1891–1894). The De Meester Cabinet also had several liberal conservative ministers.

The League of Free Liberals was founded on 23 June 1906 as a political club of these conservative liberals.[2] They had long opposed the idea of an organised political party. But because they were losing elections against the well organised parties like the Liberal Union and the Anti-Revolutionary Party, they felt forced to.

In the 1909 elections the League received a meagre four seats and were confined to opposition to a Christian democratic government. After the 1913 elections the League formed an alliance with the Liberal Union, proposing the implementation of universal suffrage and state pensions. The party doubled more than its seats to ten. Two Free Liberals become minister in the extra-parliamentary cabinet, led by Cort van Linden, which enacts universal suffrage.

In the 1918 elections the party is left with three seats. It joined the Liberal Union and the minor Middle Class Party, Neutral Party and the Economic League to form the Liberal State Party, the Freedom League on 16 April 1921.[2]

Ideology and electorate

The League was a classically liberal party emphasising the freedom of the individual. It favoured a laissez faire economic system, a nightwatchman state and free trade. It was in favour of the gradual implementation of universal suffrage. The party was a staunch defender of the separation of church and state. The League was supported by bourgeoisie voters from Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Utrecht and larger provincial centres in North and South Holland.

Election results

This table shows the League's results in elections to the House of Representatives.

Election year % Seats +/– Government
1894
28 / 100
in coalition
1897
13 / 100
Decrease 15 in coalition
1901
8 / 100
Decrease 5 in opposition
1905
9 / 100
Increase 1 in opposition
1909
4 / 100
Decrease 5 in opposition
1913
10 / 100
Increase 6 in opposition
1917
10 / 100
Steady 0 in opposition
1918 3.8%
4 / 100
Decrease 6 in opposition

Leadership

The Free Liberals' parliamentary group had the following chairmen:[3]

  • 1906–1916: Meinard Tydeman
  • 1916–1921: Alibert Cornelis Visser van IJzendoorn

References

  • "Bond van Vrije Liberalen". Parlement & Politiek (in Dutch). Retrieved 19 July 2016.
  1. ^ "Bond van Vrije Liberalen (BVL)".
  2. ^ a b "Bond van Vrije Liberalen (BVL)". Documentatiecentrum Nederlandse Politieke Partijen (DNPP) (in Dutch). Retrieved 20 March 2019.
  3. ^ "Tweede Kamerfractie Vrij-Liberalen". Parlement & Politiek (in Dutch). Retrieved 13 August 2018.
This page was last edited on 4 September 2023, at 19:32
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.