Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Back in the day, for those of us who believed that a radical rupture with the old way was (and is) necessary, 'liberal' had a very specific and pejorative meaning : The lyrics to Phil Ochs' "Love Me I'm a Liberal" is dated, but said it all. Let's find a descriptive for ourselves that does not carry this baggage with it.
"I cried when they shot Medgar Evers
Tears ran down my spine
I cried when they shot Mr. Kennedy
As though I'd lost a father of mine
But Malcolm X got what was coming
He got what he asked for this time
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
I go to civil rights rallies
And I put down the old D.A.R.
I love Harry and Sidney and Sammy
I hope every colored boy becomes a star
But don't talk about revolution
That's going a little bit too far
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
I cheered when Humphrey was chosen
My faith in the system restored
I'm glad the commies were thrown out
of the A.F.L. C.I.O. board
I love Puerto Ricans and Negros
as long as they don't move next door
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
The people of old Mississippi
Should all hang their heads in shame
I can't understand how their minds work
What's the matter don't they watch Les Crain?
But if you ask me to bus my children
I hope the cops take down your name
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
I read New republic and Nation
I've learned to take every view
You know, I've memorized Lerner and Golden
I feel like I'm almost a Jew
But when it comes to times like Korea
There's no one more red, white and blue
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
I vote for the democratic party
They want the U.N. to be strong
I go to all the Pete Seeger concerts
He sure gets me singing those songs
I'll send all the money you ask for
But don't ask me to come on along
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
Once I was young and impulsive
I wore every conceivable pin
Even went to the socialist meetings
Learned all the old union hymns
But I've grown older and wiser
And that's why I'm turning you in
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal
Phil Ochs
a bad connotation. The very uncreative never-met-a-poverty-program-I-didn't-wanted-to-fund liberals of the 60's and 70's certainly helped retire the word too. Fact is, liberals stopped calling themselves liberals because the GOP was highly successful in dirtying up the word in the minds of more moderate, independent voters.
Why is it that you and the right-wing nuts in the other party always think it's about you...you,you, you. The people who actually decided elections in this country in the overwhelmingly majority of states are centrists, moderates.
It often seems that the only reason either political party exists is so both extremist sides can keep fighting with each other. Maybe it's actually time for a new major party in the United States. One that's not being held hostage by extreme radicals from either side of the ideological divide.
The reality is that every individual has a distinct set of beliefs and only agrees with others issue-by-issue. Very few people identify themselves with distinctive political labels. When they do, their set of positions rarely corresponds exactly with the views of someone else who is using the same label.
For example, I consider myself a "libertarian" as a close substitute for "classical liberal", but I totally disagree with those who use "libertarian" to mean anarchy or "anarcho-capitalism." To an equal degree, I disagree with those who use "libertarian" as a substitute for "conservative."
To some degree, these labels are perversions or evasions of the meaning of the actual word. A "libertarian" is an advocate of liberty, not an advocate of absolute freedom, as some would have it. The French anarchists used "Libertas" as the title of their newsletters, but meant "freedom from fascism", not advocacy of liberty (freedom from coercion).
Because labels are so vague, their most common use is as an epithet, simply meaning the collective bogeymen "enemies" of whatever principle or policy a person is espousing. It's an excuse to evade civil discussion of those ideas. "They" - whatever the label - are evil, "We" - whatever the label - are good.
We use labels because they are easier than confronting the basic philosophical issues, particularly political ideas about governance. They are a way of evading civil discussion of the evidence, facts, and logic of a particular political position.
I used to be a liberal, now I am a free thinker. My beliefs have not changed but I like the idea of reviving an American movement that was popular towards the end of the 19th century. Imagine traveling many miles by horse and buggy to hear the great Free Thinker Robert Ingersoll lecture on religion, politics, and freedom. How many people today would even consider hearing someone wane on about philosophical issues, never mind an avowed atheist. Clearly many of our forefathers were more enlightened than we are today.
which is the one element of all this that the author misses.
Since it's the only element that really matters, that's a fairly large one to get wrong.
Thinking that you can logically persuade people to use one term versus another because of etymology is a tried and failed strategy. Language follows rules but not the ones that people like the author of this imagine that they do. They're laws of dissemination, usage, trenda, and so on. Steven Pinker makes good reading for more on how it works.
Words mean what we decide they mean. For lots of complicated reasons, some of which the author describes here, the terms have changed. Progessive is what people call themselves more often now, and it's going to stick. You can call yourself "a liberal" if you want, but it mostly the right wingers who use that term now, and in entirely negative ways. Since the right wingers are quickly losing all the influence they had, that word will soon go with them.
Sorry, that one is done.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
