Liberal thought

[MadArchitect]

What is it? What is it worth? What are its weaknesses, its strengths, its place in our culture? Discuss.

[Dissident Heart]

Here's a few minds who I think have worked/sacrificed to further the best of what can be named "Liberal"...flawed, imperfect and usually substantially wounded: still, worthy of our consideration when discussing what is Liberal."Democracy is not about trust; it is about distrust. It is about accountability, exposure, open debate, critical challenge, and popular input and feedback from the citizenry. It is about responsible government. We have to get our fellow Americans to trust their leaders less and themselves more, trust their own questions and suspicions, and their own desire to know what is going on." Michael Parenti"From 1945 to 2003, the United States attempted to overthrow more than 40 foreign governments, and to crush more than 30 populist-nationalist movements fighting against intolerable regimes. In the process, the US bombed some 25 countries, caused the end of life for several million people, and condemned many millions more to a life of agony and despair." William Blum"No form of government, once in power, can be trusted to limit its own ambition, to extend freedom and to wither away. This means that it is up to the citizenry, those outside of power, to engage in permanent combat with the state, short of violent, escalatory revolution, but beyond the gentility of the ballot-box, to insure justice, freedom and well being." Howard Zinn"There is no reason to accept the doctrines crafted to sustain power and privilege, or to believe that we are constrained by mysterious and unknown social laws. These are simply decisions made within institutions that are subject to human will and that must face the test of legitimacy. And if they do not meet the test, they can be replaced by other institutions that are more free and more just, as has happened often in the past." Noam Chomsky"The only thing worth globalizing is dissent." Arundhati Roy

[wwdimmitt]

Here is a quote from Weintsein and Lindberg, that summarizes what I identify as liberal thought, and which expresses why I strive to continue to think liberally about Earth and its place in the Universe:Liberal Thought by Paul Weinstein Dr. Lindberg Pol-309-01 3/5/96 Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams as part of the "Founding Fathers" of America, have had, and still have, great influences on our government. The Classical Liberal view, also know as the Liberal Tradition, dates back to to Greek thought, and was used in the Roman Republic. The Liberal Tradition was brought strongly to life, by among others, Locke in is ideas of a "Social Contract" between the government and it's individuals. These ideals have influence on Franklin, Jefferson, and Adams. It therefore makes sense to compare some of the liberal thought and ideals that these man had, to understand more about them, and more about our current government that they influenced and help create. Ben Franklin, in his Autobiography, sets up a way of living for Americans. He believes that one can reach a "Moral Perfection." By believing, and striving to find this, Franklin shows, his liberal thinking, where one needs a civil life to have a "Good Life." "Good, moral persons" should lead a civil society. Franklin then adds a list of ideas that he believes are needed for a "good life." This includes: Temperance Silence Order Resolution Frugality Industry Sincerity Moderation Cleanliness Tranquility and Humility. His "intention being to acquire the habitue of all these virtues." He sums up all his thinking with the following:Look round the habitable world, how few Know their own good, or knowing it pursue! The meaning is easy to see, pursue your goals if you know what is good for you, and this in turn will be good for all of us. This is truly liberal thinking of the individual and moral good. Those who do not know their own good are not moral, and should not do anything. However if you know you are good, and moral, a strong individual, you should pursue, and help out the Civil Society. Thomas Jefferson's writing also shows a liberal thinking. Both in his writings to Adams, and in Notes on Virginia, Jefferson writes "Those who labour in the earth are the chosen people of God." Jefferson believing in those individual are the "focus in which he [God] keeps alive that sacred fire which otherwise might escape from the face of the earth." In Jefferson's own words he is looking for the individual to do the good. That he as the power that God gave him. Jefferson goes on explanting what he feels the role of government should be, that America should continue to produce raw materials for Europe. "Let us never wish to see our citizens occupied at a work-bench, or twirling an distaff." "It is better to carry provisions and materials to workman there [Europe]." "The lost by the transportation of commodities across the Atlantic will be made up in happiness and permanence of government." John Adams in his Thoughts on Government shows his liberal, individual thought when he says "All speculative politicians will agree that the happiness of the individual is the end of man." That the happiness is what man's goal is, that a government based on this and other principles outlined in his Thoughts on Government will help this happiness become possible. He then concludes with a proposition to the individual reader "How few of the human race ever enjoyed an opportunity of making an election of government." Adams does not directly show is appreciation of the individual, but rather to the individual. He is making an argument of why the individual should get involved. Why? Because the individual matters, and has a duty to be involved. This is liberal thought to the core. All these men, Franklin, Jefferson, and Adams show at least in part, a idea that individuals matter in this new government. As shown in the liberal tradition the individual matters. These men believe the individual matters, so these men believe in liberal thought. Individuals matter, and individual freedom of thought and action are our most important cultural values. IMHO, of course! WW

[pctacitus]

Are we using the contemporary definition of liberal or the classical definition of liberal? Doug Larson: "The cat could very well be man's best friend but would never stoop to admitting it."

[MadArchitect]

We're trying to figure out what each of us means when we say liberal, and what we think of when we hear it used. It seems odd to me that the two answers we've seen so far addressed the question through quotation only.

[Izdaari]

What I mean by the term "liberal" depends on the context. I'm all for Classical Liberal thought or the Liberal Tradition as mentioned above, and Franklin, Jefferson and Adams are all among my heroes.However, I have little to no use for contemporary "liberal" ideology, which is a far different thing, and IMHO not liberal at all in the classical meaning, which in today's political terms would mean libertarian rather than liberal.Because of that, when discussing the ideology, like many of today's political liberals, I prefer to avoid the term in favor of something more descriptive. Many of them prefer "progressive." That doesn't work for me because I don't think their ideas are progressive at all but rather the reverse. "Collectivist" or "statist" seem to fit but are much too broad, encompassing rightist authoritarians as well. "Democratic socialist" covers many of them, and many of them will admit to it. But just as many will object and claim they're not really socialists, so I suppose there's nothing for it but to simply call them "leftists", as anything more precise won't cover all flavors of the syndrome. Edited by: Izdaari  at: 8/3/05 8:42 am

[wwdimmitt]

I offered the quote because it was quick, and I had some hope that it would be better to have some generally established consensus as to the definition of liberal thought rather than just individual opinions, which will surely be all over the lot.I have always happily, and vociferously, labeled myself a liberal, even at the height of the right wing campaign to malign the word, to make it the new commie in their lexicon of spin for American political campaigning. The pendulum is swinging back to the left now, and liberal is once again becoming a respected term in the mainstream media.It is interesting to me that Izzy is quite willing to define what I believe in, in spite of my own personal beliefs. I suspect that most of your opinions come from right wing spin, not from any thing that I or other invidual liberals have said.And I reject the libertarian line of pap as over simplified self indulgence that has little promise of ever sustaining a complex and mature culture.Kinda like teenagers after they read their first Ayn Rand book. WW

[MadArchitect]

Well, as a way of cutting rather cleanly through let me make a suggestion that is sure to be unpopular. I would say that the term "liberal", as it is popularly used today, does not refer to any given set of ideological or political directives, but is consistent only as a kind of historical label. That is to say, the name liberal is passed on from generation to generation among groups of people who identify themselves with whatever liberal stands for at the moment. Each generation brings something new to the label and eliminates elements that are no longer particularly happy for the group, with the result that, as one generation of liberals christens the next, the term means something subtly but definitively different than it did during the last transition. And these transitions are constant, so that liberal is changing under constant pressures. The result is, that what we refer to as the American Liberal is a group that has remained more or less cohesive throughout history, but which cannot be expected to stand for the same thing from moment to moment.The same principle would apply, incidentally, to other political and social groups -- conservatives, for instance -- so long as they do not have a rather rigidly defined statement of purpose.

[Ken Hemingway]

Of course, it's not just the names of political persuasions that change their meanings over time - many words do. "Liberal" perhaps has a special claim to our attention because it has, to a large extent, reversed its meaning. It starts out as a claim to freedom - with the implication that government should be limited. At some point it switches over by saying that freedom is of no real value to poor people if they do not have the resources to exercise them - so government should provide the resources. So now, in the US though not in Europe, liberal means big government with some limits on its powers removed (especially the power to stick it to rich people).You can see how it would be hard to give up the appeal that a word like Liberty has, even if you don't fully believe in it any more. Sort of like the old communist block countries used to like to call themselves Democatic Republics.

[Izdaari]

/agree Ken H.Quote:It is interesting to me that Izzy is quite willing to define what I believe in, in spite of my own personal beliefs. I suspect that most of your opinions come from right wing spin, not from any thing that I or other invidual liberals have said.Nope, I haven't defined what you believe with any precision at all. I know you certainly fall under the general heading of "leftist" but I don't claim to know anything more specific than that about your thinking. I would however say Ken's remarks are generally accurate concerning contemporary Americans who call themselves "liberals." Generally. There are liberals who don't quite fit, some with more concern for liberty and less for the collective. I only wish there were more like that.However, it has been my profession to create "right wing spin", not merely to consume it, so my role is not passive. Spin creation has become quite a popular occupation on all sides of the debate, as I'm sure you're aware.Quote:And I reject the libertarian line of pap as over simplified self indulgence that has little promise of ever sustaining a complex and mature culture.Yeah, that's what "liberals" always say. It's because they believe all good things come from the Almighty State, and never from the people directly or from the interactions of society without the intervention of government. What's lacking is the understanding of the concept of spontaneous order.Quote:Kinda like teenagers after they read their first Ayn Rand book.I was one of those. However, I'm 50 years old now, and I can assure you I've matured considerably since then. I'm not a doctrinaire libertarian, but a pragmatic and empirical one, as many libertarians who've argued with me on particular issues can attest. Edited by: Izdaari  at: 8/4/05 12:30 am