Conservatives vs. liberals: Before you indoctrinate your kids, read this

[RandomGuy]

By Michael Laser Michael Laser – Mon Nov 29, 3:04 pm ET
Montclair, N.J. – Without intending to, I've indoctrinated my kids.

I first realized it a few years ago. Seeing a bumper sticker that read "No Hope in Dope," my then-8-year-old asked, "Is that about Bush?"

It happened in the most natural way. They heard me groaning at every word and deed of that "misunderestimated" president, and absorbed my attitude until they could mimic it perfectly.

I'm glad my children share my political orientation, but it bothers me when I hear them unthinkingly mock and dismiss the other side – as when my son recently said, "If Republicans want smaller government, they should quit their jobs in Congress."

Lately, I've found myself in the odd position of explaining and even justifying the conservative point of view on taxes, abortion, and regulation of private enterprise, just so my children will understand that people have reasons for their beliefs, even if we disagree.

To my amazement, I've found that some of my political opposites' ideas make sense. This doesn't mean I've reversed my thinking, but it's eye-Luck_The_Fakers_opening. If you shut out the noise of talk radio and your own unshakable faith, you can find persuasive arguments on both sides of the divide. Here are a few that I came up with:

On the social safety net

The conservative view

• People are responsible for themselves – and, given the chance, they're capable of supporting themselves and their families. If the government makes a practice of providing for people (with welfare, for example), they become dependent and lose their will to work. Nothing could be more destructive to the health of our society.

The liberal view

• There are people in this country who struggle to put food on the table or can't afford medical care. A civilized society would try to help them, instead of leaving them to fend for themselves. (Someday, the one who needs a helping hand may be you, or someone you love.)

On taxes

The liberal view

• We aren't isolated individuals struggling for survival: We live together, in a society. And membership in a society that makes wealth possible comes with obligations. Those who benefit most from our freedoms must contribute their fair share to help support and protect our society.

The conservative view

• Private property means that what belongs to you is yours; if the government confiscates it, that's tyranny. Our most productive citizens – the top 10 percent of earners – already pay 68 percent of taxes collected. These rates should be cut, not raised.

On the role of government


The conservative view

• Governments tend to grow like snowballs rolling downhill. We must work to reverse this trend, or the government will expand and intrude on our lives even more than it does now.

• "That government is best which governs least." This means letting the free market do its work without a heavy hand trying to direct or restrain it.

• The legitimate functions of federal government are to provide national security through a strong defense and to protect individual freedoms.

The liberal view

• Our government's job is to solve problems that private institutions aren't solving – and there's no shortage of problems that need addressing.

• Large corporations, if unregulated, will do anything to maximize profits. Even the most courLuck_The_Fakers_ageous individual can't prevent corporate abuses; only the government has the power to do that.

• If the government can help create job opportunities during a time of high unemployment, that's a perfect use of tax dollars.

On overcoming racial discrimination


The liberal view

• The difference in income between white people and African-Americans is still significant and directly linked to centuries of oppression. We haven't overcome the legacy of slavery yet. There's a long way to go.

The conservative view

• Current law protects equal rights for all races, and it's up to individuals to work and succeed according to their abilities. We no longer need to tip the scale toward minorities to make up for what happened long ago. To do so is reverse discrimination, and creates new injustices.

On human nature and justice


The conservative view

• We have the power to choose between right and wrong and are responsible for our choices. Those who violate the law must pay the penalties. Too much leniency results in a culture of disrespect for the law and social disorder.

The liberal view

• Human beings are capable of both selflessness and brutality. Even the best of us is far from perfect. Knowing this, we rely on the rule of law – and ask that justice be tempered with mercy.

On America's future


The liberal view

• Most of the world's most successful, prosperous nations are liberal democracies that provide their citizens with a strong safety net. This represents the natural progress of civilization. It's time for us to catch up with northern Europe.

The conservative view

• What makes America great – a country so many yearn to live in – is the vastness of opportunity here. Freedom of opportunity requires freedom from government interference. We aren't Europe, and it would be wrong to follow Europe's lead.

On ideals


The conservative view

• Duty, honesty, hard work, self-sacrifice, love of country, loyalty, and self-restraint.

The liberal view

• Justice, compassion, equality of opportunity, and clear vision: what’s great about our country, and what could be better.

The middle zone

This list of polar disagreements leaves me with – fittingly – two opposite reactions. The first, more obvious conclusion is that there's no hope, common ground, or room for compromise. And so nothing will get done in Congress over the next two years.

But these opposing viewpoints also suggest a different idea: Contradictory statements can both be true. Yes, America's success lies partly in its dynamism and opportunity – and yes, progress requires that we provide for those who have lost their jobs or their health. In other words, if you set your dogma aside, you may find some truth in the ideals of people you've always disagreed with.

Which reminds me of something the extreme partisans would prefer we forget: governing in America has happened mainly in the middle zone, between the far left and far right. Yes, the differences are significant and worth negotiating over, but what we're really talking about is a few percentage points in tax rates, not a choice between socialism and the abolition of all taxes.

Contempt for the opposition may be profitable on talk radio, but it doesn't help the rest of us. All it accomplishes is to drive people further into their angry, fanatical corners.

This is the next political insight I'll be sharing with my kids.

Michael Laser is a novelist and the creator of News-Basics.com, which provides concise overviews of major news topics. More notes on liberal and conservative values can be found there.

---------------------------------------------------------

At some point, I will need to be teaching my kids to think for themselves, and this guy seems to have done a fair job at setting both sides concerns/viewpoints fairly.

It is fully possible to make public policy that incorporates the concerns of people with opposing views, and even (gasp!) that people who hold those views might do so for very principled reasons.

[TeyshaBlue]

Well I'm glad he finally had his epiphany. Still, it seems to merely be an extension of common sense, which admittedly, seems to be in short supply as of late.

[CuckingFunt]

Seems to be overthinking it, really. Raise your kids to be critical thinkers and everything else will fall into place.

[EVAY]

Raise your kids to be critical thinkers and everything else will fall into place.

:toast

[EVAY]

Seems to be overthinking it, really.

Over-wording it, at least.

[George Gervin's Afro]

My child will figure his political views on his own. I would never tell him that our president is a liar or he's a socialist because that would be my opnion. Unfortunately most kids take thier parenst word as gospel and carry on their parents points of view. I don't talk politics with my 8 yr old because he doesn't know enough to differentiate my opinions from the facts. I'd like to think my opinions are based on facts but in the end I have created my own truths. I CRINGE every time I hear someone tell hannity or Rush that their kids get the real news from them.. really? How unfair is that? Teaching your kids how to think is limiting them to seeing an issue from more than one point of view.

[boutons_deux]

"governing in America has happened mainly in the middle zone"

... which is why the Repugs moving to the extreme right and while showing no interest whatsoever in actually governing (eg 2000-2008) is profoundly anti-American. The Repugs/conservatives' fundamental principle is that "government is the problem" to be "solved" by killing it, and therefore has no role in organizing and advancing American civilization.

[Parker2112]

Common sense?

Sorry but Federal agents with hands down your wifes pants/bailouts to the wealthiest/failure to prosecute fraud rampant on wall st/illegal torture/perpetual war is NOT governing from the center.

An ounce of common sense screams otherwise. Its amazing what bullshit can be sold by the establishment as "common sense" and bought by the willing many as a-ok/not worth questioning/no need to pull my head out of the green grass.

[DarrinS]

I remember taking a trip to Yellowstone when I was a kid. We stopped at a rest stop and there was a sign that said "Don't feed the animals". I asked a park ranger why we couldn't feed the animals and he said that the animals would become conditioned to depend on humans for food. If it happend for long enough, the animals would lose their natural ability to find food and would starve to death.

[George Gervin's Afro]

I remember taking a trip to Yellowstone when I was a kid. We stopped at a rest stop and there was a sign that said "Don't feed the animals". I asked a park ranger why we couldn't feed the animals and he said that the animals would become conditioned to depend on humans for food. If it happend for long enough, the animals would lose their natural ability to find food and would starve to death.

do you have a youtube video?

[TeyshaBlue]

"governing in America has happened mainly in the middle zone"

... which is why the Repugs moving to the extreme right and while showing no interest whatsoever in actually governing (eg 2000-2008) is profoundly anti-American. The Repugs/conservatives' fundamental principle is that "government is the problem" to be "solved" by killing it, and therefore has no role in organizing and advancing American civilization.

:rolleyes

[TeyshaBlue]

Common sense?

Sorry but Federal agents with hands down your wifes pants/bailouts to the wealthiest/failure to prosecute fraud rampant on wall st/illegal torture/perpetual war is NOT governing from the center.

An ounce of common sense screams otherwise. Its amazing what bullshit can be sold by the establishment as "common sense" and bought by the willing many as a-ok/not worth questioning/no need to pull my head out of the green grass.

You need to stop hanging out with boutonski.

[DarrinS]

do you have a youtube video?

Don't be hatin on Youtubes.

[Parker2112]

You need to stop hanging out with boutonski.

Did I say something that doesnt jibe with your "peace in the valley" approach? :lol

[TeyshaBlue]

Did I say something that doesnt jibe with your "peace in the valley" approach? :lol

Swing and a miss. Keep pluggin tho.

[DarrinS]

You need to stop hanging out with boutonski.

Oh wait, was she a great big fat person?

[TeyshaBlue]

Oh wait, was she a great big fat person?

:lol:lol

[Parker2112]

Swing and a miss. Keep pluggin tho.

wind up and...Do you disagree with the state of affairs as stated?

[TeyshaBlue]

wind up and...Do you disagree with the state of affairs as stated?

Your take of the state of affairs? Yes. It's hyperbole on meth which, oddly, is boutonski's, Yoni's, et al, MO.

[Parker2112]

I understand the parallel with Boutons, cause I usually agree with his take. I dont read much of Yonis stuff, so I cant agree or otherwise. I also understand the resistance to alarm, because we all want to believe everything is going to be alright.

But can you tell me which of the issues specifically I am overstating (Recap: TSA, Bailuts, QEs, War-after-war, torture, no prosecutions for wall st)?

[TeyshaBlue]

I understand the parallel with Boutons, cause I usually agree with his take. I dont read much of Yonis stuff, so I cant agree or otherwise. I also understand the resistance to alarm, because we all want to believe everything is going to be alright.

But can you tell me which of the issues specifically I am overstating (Recap: TSA, Bailuts, QEs, War-after-war, torture, no prosecutions for wall st)?

I'll handle the recap. Thx.


Sorry but Federal agents with hands down your wifes pants/bailouts to the wealthiest/failure to prosecute fraud rampant on wall st/illegal torture/perpetual war is NOT governing from the center.

1. "Federal agents with hands down your wifes pants." Sorry. Not happening to my wife.
2. "bailouts to the wealthiest". I'll give you this...since it's really not a modern phenomenon I don't understand the sudden "OH NOES!" it's taking on.
3. "failure to prosecute fraud rampant on wall street". Might be a touch premature on that one. Let's see how it plays out in light of the MERS fiasaco.
4. "Perpetual war". I'm sorry. But, no. It's not perpetual. Say what you mean, not what sounds good.

[TeyshaBlue]

I'll handle the recap. Thx.



1. "Federal agents with hands down your wifes pants." Sorry. Not happening to my wife.
2. "bailouts to the wealthiest". I'll give you this...since it's really not a modern phenomenon I don't understand the sudden "OH NOES!" it's taking on.
3. "failure to prosecute fraud rampant on wall street". Might be a touch premature on that one. Let's see how it plays out in light of the MERS fiasaco.
4. "Perpetual war". I'm sorry. But, no. It's not perpetual. Say what you mean, not what sounds good.

Rats! I missed the torture.

Is this still going on?

[Parker2112]

Fair enough. You accept life is pretty shit here at home. I understand.

[TeyshaBlue]

Fair enough. You accept life is pretty shit here at home. I understand.

Strike two.

[Parker2112]

Ill be the judge of shitty in my own posts thanks.

Ball.

[TeyshaBlue]

Ill be the judge of shitty in my own posts thanks.

Ball.

You'll not ascribe an attitude to me that is not warranted.

And no, you don't understand.

Next batter.

[TeyshaBlue]

1. "Federal agents with hands down your wifes pants." Sorry. Not happening to my wife.
2. "bailouts to the wealthiest". I'll give you this...since it's really not a modern phenomenon I don't understand the sudden "OH NOES!" it's taking on.
3. "failure to prosecute fraud rampant on wall street". Might be a touch premature on that one. Let's see how it plays out in light of the MERS fiasaco.
4. "Perpetual war". I'm sorry. But, no. It's not perpetual. Say what you mean, not what sounds good.

Care to actually revisit your points, such as they are?

[Parker2112]

Please. What you find acceptable, I find completely unacceptable. What you deem as the status quo, I deem as rotten to the core. Your attitude is your own, but I am free to find it completely flawed, and the root of most of the problems that I've stated.

I'll take my base now.

[Parker2112]

You say Boutons and I are on Meth. I say you and a few others are on Opiates.

Agree to disagree.

[TeyshaBlue]

Please. What you find acceptable, I find completely unacceptable. What you deem as the status quo, I deem as rotten to the core. Your attitude is your own, but I am free to find it completely flawed, and the root of most of the problems that I've stated.

I'll take my base now.

Your premise is flawed..conclusions flowing from it...well, garbage in, garbage out.

Nobody is putting their hands down my wife's pants. Just not happening. Sorry to dissapoint.
I gave you the bailouts, but I deny the sudden importance. Either you've been crusading for decades about this, or it's now convenient for whatever reason. Color me suspicious of your motives.
You are premature in your touchdown dance with wall st. The story has scarcely begun. However, I suspect it's again, convenient for you to conclude the story now.

And while you're learning the game, I didn't say you were on meth, knucklehead. Lrn2read.:rolleyes

[Parker2112]

so what the govt doesnt do to you doesnt happen?

And if there is a history of something, right or wrong, we can overlook it?

Thats a pretty sad showing Teysha. And I am the one that is using flawed logic?

[TeyshaBlue]

so what the govt doesnt do to you doesnt happen?

And if there is a history of something, right or wrong, we can overlook it?

Thats a pretty sad showing Teysha. And I am the one that is using flawed logic?

Dude, it was you that put the attributive adjective "your" in the sentence in reference to wives. Don't say what you don't mean. If you meant it in the larger sense, that is "your wife" being all wives, which is equally silly, then say it. Fuck. I'm not sure what the hell you meant. I don't think you do either.

Did I actually say overlook something? Um, no I didn't. I just question why your hair (parenthetically) is on fire right now. It seems disingenuous at best.

Parse your thoughts just a little bit before you commit them to a post. It'll save us shit loads of time.

[Parker2112]

lets play word games?

Well, thats about as good a defense as you could mount under the circumstances, i suppose...congrats. Might want to cover your bloomers on the way back to the dugout though...

[Wild Cobra]

Well, I still see some of these arguments incomplete.

On the social safety net

The conservative view

• People are responsible for themselves – and, given the chance, they're capable of supporting themselves and their families. If the government makes a practice of providing for people (with welfare, for example), they become dependent and lose their will to work. Nothing could be more destructive to the health of our society.

The liberal view

• There are people in this country who struggle to put food on the table or can't afford medical care. A civilized society would try to help them, instead of leaving them to fend for themselves. (Someday, the one who needs a helping hand may be you, or someone you love.)

He approaches this as an all or nothing deal. Conservatives are all for giving and helping others, but though charity. Past that, no conservative I hear of advocates eliminationg government assistance. Just to make people accountable and actually help, rather than not care if people stay on the system.

On taxes

The liberal view

• We aren't isolated individuals struggling for survival: We live together, in a society. And membership in a society that makes wealth possible comes with obligations. Those who benefit most from our freedoms must contribute their fair share to help support and protect our society.

The conservative view

• Private property means that what belongs to you is yours; if the government confiscates it, that's tyranny. Our most productive citizens – the top 10 percent of earners – already pay 68 percent of taxes collected. These rates should be cut, not raised.
Again, extremes of both sides, but I'm beginning to think he's arguing liberal vs. libertarian instead.


On overcoming racial discrimination


The liberal view

• The difference in income between white people and African-Americans is still significant and directly linked to centuries of oppression. We haven't overcome the legacy of slavery yet. There's a long way to go.

The conservative view

• Current law protects equal rights for all races, and it's up to individuals to work and succeed according to their abilities. We no longer need to tip the scale toward minorities to make up for what happened long ago. To do so is reverse discrimination, and creates new injustices.
Too bad it doesn't mention that often, blacks are to blame for their own bias that they won't get a fair shake, and use it for excuses throughout life, instead of manning up.

On human nature and justice

[QUOTE]On America's future


The liberal view

• Most of the world's most successful, prosperous nations are liberal democracies that provide their citizens with a strong safety net. This represents the natural progress of civilization. It's time for us to catch up with northern Europe.

The conservative view

• What makes America great – a country so many yearn to live in – is the vastness of opportunity here. Freedom of opportunity requires freedom from government interference. We aren't Europe, and it would be wrong to follow Europe's lead.
LOL...

All the other prosperous nations are liberal! It took them thousands of years to get where they are. America is almost 240 years old. We passed them long ago with more conservative values, and are now sliding backwards with liberal ideals.

On ideals


The conservative view

• Duty, honesty, hard work, self-sacrifice, love of country, loyalty, and self-restraint.

The liberal view

• Justice, compassion, equality of opportunity, and clear vision: what’s great about our country, and what could be better.
The conservative views include those listed as liberal. The liberal just fail to believe in hard work, honesty, love of country, etc.

[Wild Cobra]

I remember taking a trip to Yellowstone when I was a kid. We stopped at a rest stop and there was a sign that said "Don't feed the animals". I asked a park ranger why we couldn't feed the animals and he said that the animals would become conditioned to depend on humans for food. If it happend for long enough, the animals would lose their natural ability to find food and would starve to death.
I think we need to remind our legislators of that.

[Parker2112]

Dude, ...j4XT-l-_3y0... save us shit loads of time.

[ploto]

The conservative view

• Governments tend to grow like snowballs rolling downhill. We must work to reverse this trend, or the government will expand and intrude on our lives even more than it does now.

When did conservatives last practice this?

[LnGrrrR]

All the other prosperous nations are liberal! It took them thousands of years to get where they are. America is almost 240 years old. We passed them long ago with more conservative values, and are now sliding backwards with liberal ideals.

Yeah! If only we could be as conservative as the Middle East!

[LnGrrrR]

The conservative views include those listed as liberal. The liberal just fail to believe in hard work, honesty, love of country, etc.

:rolleyes

[baseline bum]

I remember taking a trip to Yellowstone when I was a kid. We stopped at a rest stop and there was a sign that said "Don't feed the animals". I asked a park ranger why we couldn't feed the animals and he said that the animals would become conditioned to depend on humans for food. If it happend for long enough, the animals would lose their natural ability to find food and would starve to death.

I wonder what the ranger would say if you started chopping down all the whitebark trees, shot all the elk, and in general hoarded all the resources they depend on.

[LnGrrrR]

I wonder what the ranger would say if you started chopping down all the whitebark trees, shot all the elk, and in general hoarded all the resources they depend on.

Obvious answer is obvious.

The animals are too damned lazy to just move to a new habitat with shelter and food. They want a handout.

[Wild Cobra]

Yeah! If only we could be as conservative as the Middle East!
I think you know what I mean. Why must you make mockery of it?

[Wild Cobra]

I wonder what the ranger would say if you started chopping down all the whitebark trees, shot all the elk, and in general hoarded all the resources they depend on.
-ALL-

Who does that?

[DarrinS]

I wonder what the ranger would say if you started chopping down all the whitebark trees, shot all the elk, and in general hoarded all the resources they depend on.


"Please leave the park, immediately?"


See, there's a reason we preserve US National Parks and we have other areas to harvest resources. But, in general, you shouldn't feed animals. It's also better to teach a man to fish than to give him a fish.

[Parker2112]

Darrin your on a roll with this park metaphor.

[Wild Cobra]

Darrin your on a roll with this park metaphor.
He also quoted the Bible. Guess you never attended Sunday School.

[baseline bum]

"Please leave the park, immediately?"


See, there's a reason we preserve US National Parks and we have other areas to harvest resources. But, in general, you shouldn't feed animals. It's also better to teach a man to fish than to give him a fish.

Bears aren't productive members of society. They don't deserve our welfare. It's not my fault I'm skilled with a rifle and they're stupid.

[DarrinS]

Darrin your on a roll with this park metaphor.

Baseline's having a hard time understanding it.

[Parker2112]

He also quoted the Bible. Guess you never attended Sunday School.

that was a gem too. I lol'd.

[Winehole23]

4. "Perpetual war". I'm sorry. But, no. It's not perpetual. Say what you mean, not what sounds good.Since WWII, haven't we been on a war footing more or less the whole way? That's 65 years now.

Just curious, what counts as perpetual war, TeyshaBlue?




(And btw, when do we return from Iraq and Afghanistan?)

[Winehole23]

(for the fish in water, is the water noticeable?)

[Winehole23]

Oh, and have you read the new NATO mission statement?

[Winehole23]

(disclosure: this wino only recently heard of it, and has not gotten around to reading it himself)

[Winehole23]

(Be the first on your block, SpursTalk)

[Winehole23]

The recent MK Bhadrakumar (http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/article915523.ece?homepage=true)piece was illuminating as usual.

[Wild Cobra]

Oh, and have you read the new NATO mission statement?
I'll bite. I haven't seen a NATO mission statement for about 20 years. What is it?

[Winehole23]

Jeez, I just gave a link to commentary. Didn't you read that, yet?

[RandomGuy]

My child will figure his political views on his own. I would never tell him that our president is a liar or he's a socialist because that would be my opnion. Unfortunately most kids take thier parenst word as gospel and carry on their parents points of view. I don't talk politics with my 8 yr old because he doesn't know enough to differentiate my opinions from the facts. I'd like to think my opinions are based on facts but in the end I have created my own truths. I CRINGE every time I hear someone tell hannity or Rush that their kids get the real news from them.. really? How unfair is that? Teaching your kids how to think is limiting them to seeing an issue from more than one point of view.

Yeah, I think 8 is a bit young to start teaching this sort of stuff. I think one has to really make a sharp deliniation between facts and opinion, something that gets blurred for a lot of people.

Not sure when *is* the right time to start, though. Parenting is a lot easier when all you have to deal with is trying to get them to eat their vegetables.

[RandomGuy]

I remember taking a trip to Yellowstone when I was a kid. We stopped at a rest stop and there was a sign that said "Don't feed the animals". I asked a park ranger why we couldn't feed the animals and he said that the animals would become conditioned to depend on humans for food. If it happend for long enough, the animals would lose their natural ability to find food and would starve to death.

Which is something of a polite lie on the part of the ranger.

They become dependent on humans, and then hang around humans. This is ok if the animal is relatively innocuous, like a racoon, but becomes VERY problematic if it is a bear or a moose.

The ranger didn't want to tell you that the animals would have to be killed to protect humans.

[TeyshaBlue]

Since WWII, haven't we been on a war footing more or less the whole way? That's 65 years now.

Just curious, what counts as perpetual war, TeyshaBlue?




(And btw, when do we return from Iraq and Afghanistan?)

Point taken and kinda exposes where I wanted to go with this until Parker lost the ability to communicate.

We've been on a war footing longer than that I would argue....and it's certainly not unique to America by any stretch of the imagination. One would almost entertain it's part and parcel to the human condition.

[Wild Cobra]

Jeez, I just gave a link to commentary. Didn't you read that, yet?
No, I was too busy trying to get through all the unread posts. I'll take a quick look at the links I didn't open, but cannot spend too mush time today.

[Wild Cobra]

I don't see a mission statement in that link. When i did a search, I found a link to the 2009 Mission Statement, and that there is a 2010 draft, but I didn't find a final. For that matter, I didn't find an actual mission statement anywhere. I forget, but maybe it's classified.

[RandomGuy]

I don't see a mission statement in that link. When i did a search, I found a link to the 2009 Mission Statement, and that there is a 2010 draft, but I didn't find a final. For that matter, I didn't find an actual mission statement anywhere. I forget, but maybe it's classified.

Classified? :lol

Nope.

Posted on the website, but not quite called a "mission statement", but rather a "strategic concept".

Below is the pdf link for it, from the official NATO website.
http://www.nato.int/lisbon2010/strategic-concept-2010-eng.pdf





1. NATO’s fundamental and enduring purpose is to safeguard the freedom and security of all its members by political and military means. Today, the Alliance remains an essential source of stability in an unpredictable world.

2. NATO member states form a unique community of values, committed to the principles of individual liberty, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. The Alliance is firmly committed to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and to the Washington Treaty, which affirms the primary responsibility of the Security Council for the maintenance of international peace and security.

3. The political and military bonds between Europe and North America have been forged in NATO since the Alliance was founded in 1949; the transatlantic link remains as strong, and as important to the preservation of Euro-Atlantic peace and security, as ever. The security of NATO members on both sides of the Atlantic is indivisible. We will continue to defend it together, on the basis of solidarity, shared purpose and fair burden-sharing.

4. The modern security environment contains a broad and evolving set of challenges to the security of NATO’s territory and populations. In order to assure their security, the Alliance must and will continue fulfilling effectively three essential core tasks, all of which contribute to safeguarding Alliance members, and always in accordance with international law:

a. Collective defence. NATO members will always assist each other against attack, in accordance with Article 5 of the Washington Treaty. That commitment remains firm and binding. NATO will deter and defend against any threat of aggression, and against emerging security challenges where they threaten the fundamental security of individual Allies or the Alliance as a whole.

b. Crisis management. NATO has a unique and robust set of political and military capabilities to address the full spectrum of crises – before, during and after conflicts. NATO will actively employ an appropriate mix of those political and military tools to help manage developing crises that have the potential to affect Alliance security, before they escalate into conflicts; to stop ongoing conflicts where they affect Alliance security; and to help consolidate stability in post-conflict situations where that contributes to Euro-Atlantic security.

c. Cooperative security. The Alliance is affected by, and can affect, political and security developments beyond its borders. The Alliance will engage actively to enhance international security, through partnership with relevant countries and other international organisations; by contributing actively to arms control, nonproliferation and disarmament; and by keeping the door to
membership in the Alliance open to all European democracies that meet NATO’s standards.

5. NATO remains the unique and essential transatlantic forum for consultations on all matters that affect the territorial integrity, political independence and security of its members, as set out in Article 4 of the Washington Treaty. Any security issue of interest to any Ally can be brought to the NATO table, to share information, exchange views and, where appropriate, forge common approaches.

6. In order to carry out the full range of NATO missions as effectively and efficiently as possible, Allies will engage in a continuous process of reform, modernisation and transformation.

[RandomGuy]

Also because it seems relevant, the treaty itself:

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm

with current member countries:
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/nato_countries.htm