Difference between revisions of "Liberalism/US"
(Moved to ENJOYING BRIAN PEPPERS DAY?????) |
(revert vandalism) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | ==Overview== | ||
| + | [[Liberalism]] as a [[political movement]] in the {{USA}} has some specific attributes not necessarily shared by the liberal political movements in other countries.{{seed}} | ||
| + | ===powermonger hijacking=== | ||
| + | As is common in politics, the basic idea of liberalism in the {{USA}} has been hijacked to some degree by [[authoritarian leader]] types – in much the same way that the [[US conservative]] ideology has been hijacked by [[neoconservative]]s. It is thus worth distinguishing between core liberal values and the excesses of the hijackers. | ||
| + | * '''core liberal values''' include: | ||
| + | ** stimulating the productive effects of inter-human competition ([[free enterprise]]) by removing the cheats and parasitical constraints imposed by those with the power to do so (traditionally: "the guys with the swords – cronies of the king – who have ALWAYS been the chief enemies of enterprise."{{source|1}}) | ||
| + | ** tolerance of individual differences | ||
| + | ** state intervention to help the [[poverty|poor]] – partly out of compassion, but partly (and more practically) to minimize the waste of human talent which otherwise enriches the [[free marketplace]] ("But they see no tragedy in an adult experiencing some failure and having to work hard to rise back up again, so long as she/he is not blocked by artificial impediments like [[racism]], [[sexism]], and [[health care (US)|fixable ill health]] etc. or cheating by the mighty."{{source|1}}) | ||
| + | * '''"lefty" or "liberal hijacker" values''' include: | ||
| + | ** ''aggressive'' leveling of social opportunity ''arbitrated from above'' (government agencies and bureaucracy) by [[authoriarian leader]]s posing as "wise allocators" | ||
| + | *** this includes removing or severely limiting the idea of free markets, as they cannot be controlled hierarchically | ||
| + | US liberals are often seen as being at odds with [[US libertarians]], especially over "[[big government]]" issues, when in fact there is significant overlap. The differences (which do exist) between the two philosophies have been emphasized and widened by [[powermonger]]-hijackers in both camps using [[wedge issue]]s to minimize cooperation between them. | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[US conservatives]], especially those on the far right and [[neocons]] posing as conservatives, try to equate "liberal" with "socialist"; in the current political climate, and with the aid of "liberal" hijackers, they have largely succeeded. | ||
| + | |||
| + | "Liberal(ism)" is one of several terms that [[Issuepedia]] seeks to [[Issuepedia:reclaiming words|reclaim]] from abusers. | ||
| + | ==Links== | ||
| + | ===Opinion=== | ||
| + | * [http://www.m4040.com/Liberals.htm M40 Attempts to explain Liberalism]: a very nice collection of oversimplifications and distortions that neatly encapsulates the worst popular conservative views on liberalism | ||
| + | ===Projects=== | ||
| + | * [http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/ The Rockridge Institute]: "rethinking progressive politics, re[[interpretive framing|framing]] public debate, changing public policy"; "uses research in human cognition to help progressives make arguments that make sense to their audience." | ||
| + | ** [http://www.rockridgenation.org/ Rockridge Nation]: online community | ||
| + | ** [http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/thinkingpoints Thinking Points] book: "the Rockridge Institute's handbook for the grassroots progressive community." ... "a short, easy-to-read systematic account of the progressive vision, for the morals and principles that apply across issue areas, and for all the essentials of [[interpretive framing|framing]]." | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===Sources=== | ||
| + | ====1==== | ||
| + | '''2007-03-25''' [http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2007/03/da-brins-latest-book-media-podcasts.html#2294971319163175405 12:42 comment] by [[David Brin]] | ||
| + | ==Related Articles== | ||
| + | * US liberals tend to be [[The United States Democratic Party|Democrats]], though there is also some overlap with the [[US libertarian party]] | ||
| + | * [[US liberalism]] tends to be directly at odds with [[US conservatism]] on many issues; they are the two main poles in [[US politics]] | ||
| + | ==Quotes== | ||
| + | "As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality." – [[wikiquote:George Washington|George Washington]] (attributed) (What was Washington's definition of "liberal"?) | ||
| + | ==Notes== | ||
| + | From [[David Brin]] [http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2006/08/worst-habit-of-liberalism-handing-karl.html]: | ||
| + | {{quoteon}}Won’t you try this little ''mental experiment'' yourself? Start by listing a dozen or so “standard liberal positions.” For example you expect a liberal to: | ||
| + | |||
| + | * oppose the Iraq War | ||
| + | * welcome [[US immigration|immigrants]] | ||
| + | * support the undiluted right to [[abortion]] | ||
| + | * oppose Arctic or offshore drilling | ||
| + | * oppose [[nuclear power]] | ||
| + | * oppose tax cuts | ||
| + | * support [[gay marriage]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | ... and so on. | ||
| + | |||
| + | If you don’t like my list, write one of your own! Make your own list of positions you deem important. I’ll wait. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Now try this. Imagine a person who holds ''all'' of the correct views ''except one''. Suppose - on just that one issue - a person strongly takes the ''opposite view''. Not quietly, but openly, and vigorously. Now picture how that person would be received in most liberal gatherings. | ||
| + | What name would they be called? | ||
| + | {{quoteoff}} | ||
| + | A longer list of "knee-jerk liberal" positions might be useful; the above is certainly a good start. (Are any of these "core" liberal positions? Are there other "core" liberal positions which should be listed?) | ||
| + | ===progressive?=== | ||
| + | What is the difference between "progressive" and "liberal"? What do they have in common? | ||
Revision as of 15:22, 15 August 2008
Overview
Liberalism as a political movement in the United States has some specific attributes not necessarily shared by the liberal political movements in other countries.
|
This page is a seed article. You can help Issuepedia water it: make a request to expand a given page and/or donate to help give us more writing-hours!
|
powermonger hijacking
As is common in politics, the basic idea of liberalism in the United States has been hijacked to some degree by authoritarian leader types – in much the same way that the US conservative ideology has been hijacked by neoconservatives. It is thus worth distinguishing between core liberal values and the excesses of the hijackers.
- core liberal values include:
- stimulating the productive effects of inter-human competition (free enterprise) by removing the cheats and parasitical constraints imposed by those with the power to do so (traditionally: "the guys with the swords – cronies of the king – who have ALWAYS been the chief enemies of enterprise."1)
- tolerance of individual differences
- state intervention to help the poor – partly out of compassion, but partly (and more practically) to minimize the waste of human talent which otherwise enriches the free marketplace ("But they see no tragedy in an adult experiencing some failure and having to work hard to rise back up again, so long as she/he is not blocked by artificial impediments like racism, sexism, and fixable ill health etc. or cheating by the mighty."1)
- "lefty" or "liberal hijacker" values include:
- aggressive leveling of social opportunity arbitrated from above (government agencies and bureaucracy) by authoriarian leaders posing as "wise allocators"
- this includes removing or severely limiting the idea of free markets, as they cannot be controlled hierarchically
- aggressive leveling of social opportunity arbitrated from above (government agencies and bureaucracy) by authoriarian leaders posing as "wise allocators"
US liberals are often seen as being at odds with US libertarians, especially over "big government" issues, when in fact there is significant overlap. The differences (which do exist) between the two philosophies have been emphasized and widened by powermonger-hijackers in both camps using wedge issues to minimize cooperation between them.
US conservatives, especially those on the far right and neocons posing as conservatives, try to equate "liberal" with "socialist"; in the current political climate, and with the aid of "liberal" hijackers, they have largely succeeded.
"Liberal(ism)" is one of several terms that Issuepedia seeks to reclaim from abusers.
Links
Opinion
- M40 Attempts to explain Liberalism: a very nice collection of oversimplifications and distortions that neatly encapsulates the worst popular conservative views on liberalism
Projects
- The Rockridge Institute: "rethinking progressive politics, reframing public debate, changing public policy"; "uses research in human cognition to help progressives make arguments that make sense to their audience."
- Rockridge Nation: online community
- Thinking Points book: "the Rockridge Institute's handbook for the grassroots progressive community." ... "a short, easy-to-read systematic account of the progressive vision, for the morals and principles that apply across issue areas, and for all the essentials of framing."
Sources
1
2007-03-25 12:42 comment by David Brin
Related Articles
- US liberals tend to be Democrats, though there is also some overlap with the US libertarian party
- US liberalism tends to be directly at odds with US conservatism on many issues; they are the two main poles in US politics
Quotes
"As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality." – George Washington (attributed) (What was Washington's definition of "liberal"?)
Notes
From David Brin [1]:
Won’t you try this little mental experiment yourself? Start by listing a dozen or so “standard liberal positions.” For example you expect a liberal to:
... and so on. If you don’t like my list, write one of your own! Make your own list of positions you deem important. I’ll wait. Now try this. Imagine a person who holds all of the correct views except one. Suppose - on just that one issue - a person strongly takes the opposite view. Not quietly, but openly, and vigorously. Now picture how that person would be received in most liberal gatherings. What name would they be called? |
A longer list of "knee-jerk liberal" positions might be useful; the above is certainly a good start. (Are any of these "core" liberal positions? Are there other "core" liberal positions which should be listed?)
progressive?
What is the difference between "progressive" and "liberal"? What do they have in common?