The spectacular rise of anti-establishment parties has buried
the liberal consensus on which Europe's security was so dependent over the past three decades.
Not exact matches
Political scientist Keith Brownsey of Mount Royal University argues the
Liberals paid close attention to the many fumbles made by Harper's Tories
on the energy file: failing to build solid relationships with First Nations, allowing environmental groups to seize the public - relations initiative, not asserting federal authority and handing provinces like B.C. and Quebec control of the political agenda, keeping Canada outside of the international
consensus on climate change, and ignoring legitimate criticisms of the federal review process.
In thus explaining and championing religious pluralism
on affirmative theological grounds rather than
on negative or concessionary ones,
liberal Protestants could make one of the more important of their distinctive contributions to the moral coherence «and
consensus that our sprawling society needs but has found it difficult to maintain.
The usual assertions are (1) that this kind of religion is today
on the defensive; (2) that the defensive posture is occasioned by the flourishing of «conservative churches» (although the alleged
liberal enervation is also seen in more autonomous terms); (3) that the growth in religious conservatism and conservative churches is itself the result of widespread reaction against «secular humanist» values and against those who hold such values; (4) that our society as a whole has been experiencing a breakdown in moral
consensus, a loss of moral coherence somehow connected with a decline in oldline Protestant dominance; and (5) that some or all of these happenings have been quite sudden, so that the early 1960s can be taken as a kind of benchmark — as a time before the fall.
Their advisers have once again allowed themselves to be influenced by a current «
consensus» based
on secular -
liberal ideology rather than evidence and experience.
The Conservatives and the
Liberal Democrats presented a united front today when they called
on the new environment secretary to join their climate change
consensus.
It was a reasonable assumption, as until fairly recently every major political party had converged
on the same socially and economically
liberal consensus.
Our argument is that Labour's move to the «
liberal consensus»
on the EU and immigration left many of their core voters out in the cold a long time before UKIP were an effective political presence.
He said: «There is a view now in many parts of the world that the only way to ensure prosperity and stability is to suppress freedom to crack down
on pesky NGOs and irritating journalists and independent judges and generally to deprecate the western
liberal consensus about how a society should be ordered.
Worst of all is the sense that a fear pervades the Coalition Government of taking
on the
liberal consensus in the media.
The Respect MP used the article to hit out against the Conservative, Labour and
Liberal Democrat
consensus on issues like Afghanistan and spending cuts.
Judith, how about an article starting by mentioning «the reason why educated
Liberals reject the
consensus on climate change science»?
For about as long, some doubters have argued that this
consensus is nonexistent or premature — and that, despite repeated studies identifying it, media attempts to report
on the
consensus constitute so much
liberal bias.
People's political orientations are strongly related to their perception of the scientific
consensus on climate change.4 In this survey, a strong majority of
liberal Democrats (88 %) say most climate scientists think the Earth is warming due to human activity.
Consistent with the original study, we find robust and replicated evidence that communicating the scientific
consensus on human - caused climate change leads to significant and substantial changes in perceived scientific agreement among conservatives, moderates, and
liberals alike.
The skeptical idea of a runaway
liberal organization, which uses claims of «
consensus» in an effort to force its unreasonable assertions about man's influence
on climate are a farce.
Not to mention, I don't think Dr. Curry has hesitated to acknowledge the link between skepticism and conservatism / libertarianism
on one hand, and the
consensus and
liberal / progressive views
on the other.
«I don't think Dr. Curry has hesitated to acknowledge the link between skepticism and conservatism / libertarianism
on one hand, and the
consensus and
liberal / progressive views
on the other.»