If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
On Liberty and Liberalism
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
It has been made clear by the past few weeks' discussion on these boards that the word 'liberal' has some rather unpleasant connotations for those on the Western side of the Pond.
Now, it seems to me something of a contradiction that someone might praise and espouse the principles of liberty and yet be ill at ease or even scornful of the philosophy of liberalism.
Some possible explanations present themselves:
It is quite possible that the word 'liberal' has been bastardized, so removed by years of pejorative use that it is no longer possible to regard it in the sense it was originally meant. This would, indeed, seem to be the case: 'liberalism' seems to be considered anti-regulation, anti-family, anti-marriage, and the rest. It seemed to be anything slightly less rigid than the Puritan ethic upon which the original American colonies were founded, and which still permeates much of the political arena in the USA today. Probably thanks to the McCarthyite witch-hunts of the early 1950's the popular perception of 'liberal' is that of someone just to the right of outright communism - or even anarchism.
A second, and far more controversial, interpretation would be that those who oppose what they call 'liberalism' are, in fact, opposed to the dictionary definition of liberalism. These people genuinely are intolerant and scornful of individual rights, and their support of the concept of 'liberty' is merely a flag of convenience to hide their true authoritarian and/or totalitarian tendencies. This, of course, is an extreme and cynical interpretation, and is probably only true in a vanishing minority of cases: I certainly hope that this is the case.
No, it is far more likely that the popular perception of the word's meaning has changed. Although language is liable to evolution with time, I do not consider this change to have been a beneficial one: it has served to alienate from certain Americans a concept that they should, in fact, be holding to heart (if, indeed, they support the spirit of their Constitution).
It is almost certainly not the case that American citizens suffer from any material or genetic mental incapacity to see the word 'liberal' in a new light. Their chronic misinterpretation of the word is entirely cultural - entirely a matter of convention drilled into them from an early age. If they are truly the free men and women they aspire and profess to be they will shed themselves of this misleading, incorrect and bastardized use of a concept they and their Founding Fathers supported. Their freedom of expression is impaired every day they fail to do so.
From the OED, 10th Ed.
liberal - adj.
1) respectful and accepting of behaviour or opinions different from one's own: open to new ideas. > (of a society, law etc.) favourable to individual rights and freedoms. > Theology regarding many traditional beliefs as dispensable, invalidated by modern thought, or liable to change.
2) (in a political context) favouring individual liberty, free trade, and moderate political and social reform. > (Liberal) (in the UK) of or relating to the Liberal Democrat party.
3) (of education) concerned with broadening general knowledge and experience.
4) (especially of an interpretation of a law) broadly construed; not strictly literal.
5) given, used, or giving in generous amounts.
- n.
1) a person of liberal views.
2) (Liberal) (in the UK) a Liberal Democrat.
Now, it seems to me something of a contradiction that someone might praise and espouse the principles of liberty and yet be ill at ease or even scornful of the philosophy of liberalism.
Some possible explanations present themselves:
It is quite possible that the word 'liberal' has been bastardized, so removed by years of pejorative use that it is no longer possible to regard it in the sense it was originally meant. This would, indeed, seem to be the case: 'liberalism' seems to be considered anti-regulation, anti-family, anti-marriage, and the rest. It seemed to be anything slightly less rigid than the Puritan ethic upon which the original American colonies were founded, and which still permeates much of the political arena in the USA today. Probably thanks to the McCarthyite witch-hunts of the early 1950's the popular perception of 'liberal' is that of someone just to the right of outright communism - or even anarchism.
A second, and far more controversial, interpretation would be that those who oppose what they call 'liberalism' are, in fact, opposed to the dictionary definition of liberalism. These people genuinely are intolerant and scornful of individual rights, and their support of the concept of 'liberty' is merely a flag of convenience to hide their true authoritarian and/or totalitarian tendencies. This, of course, is an extreme and cynical interpretation, and is probably only true in a vanishing minority of cases: I certainly hope that this is the case.
No, it is far more likely that the popular perception of the word's meaning has changed. Although language is liable to evolution with time, I do not consider this change to have been a beneficial one: it has served to alienate from certain Americans a concept that they should, in fact, be holding to heart (if, indeed, they support the spirit of their Constitution).
It is almost certainly not the case that American citizens suffer from any material or genetic mental incapacity to see the word 'liberal' in a new light. Their chronic misinterpretation of the word is entirely cultural - entirely a matter of convention drilled into them from an early age. If they are truly the free men and women they aspire and profess to be they will shed themselves of this misleading, incorrect and bastardized use of a concept they and their Founding Fathers supported. Their freedom of expression is impaired every day they fail to do so.
0
Comments
community has been removed from communism
society has been removed from socialism
radicals have been removed from radicalism
all of these are now insults in the wrong hands.
the original derivations of many political words have been irrevocably damaged by the impact of the cold war on the US, thus by the impact of US culture on the world.
interestingly it is only the politics of the left that has suffered a butchering of its language. and they say america isn't a right-wing nation.......
what most people associate with communism is in fact stalinism, maoism, and the dictatorship of the proletariat.
what most people associate with radicalism are the violent protestors against globalisation.
i could go on, but its already boring.
Nolite te bastardes carborundorum