Liberty vs. 'Liberals'

Post by **_Ren** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 8:23 am

I find it intriguing that a country that has the Statue of Liberty standing proudly at it's Eastern coast and seems to so consistently pride itself on it's inherent 'freedoms' - at the same time - has such a large proportion of it's population degrading and attacking 'liberals'.

...when Americans hear the word 'liberal', do they hear something different to what I hear?

Not actually looking to get into a debate over this. (Although I'm sure I could be goaded into one ;) )
I'm more trying to just understand the thinking. Cos I honestly don't get it.

Post by **_Dr. Shades** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:13 pm

Yes, I'm quite sure Americans hear something quite different:

"Liberty:" Freedom, etc.
"Liberal:" Liberally spending your tax dollars.

Post by **_Bond...James Bond** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:05 pm

Yeah it's weird.

This country started out as very liberal in comparison to "Old Europe" but it fell behind. I think our large religious believing group over here consider equate religious belief with conservatism, and thus liberalism is that evil "OTHER". Also I think that the anti-communist/socialist feeling that was so influential during the Cold War hasn't worn off yet, and people equate liberal thought with the more radical left wing economic views.

Post by **_Ren** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:12 pm

OK - thanks for the replies.

What I'm trying to work out is: Are people against 'liberals' because they think they are for 'too much' liberty?
Or is the word 'Liberal' simply a short-hand for a given social or political view, that can encompass all kinds of other specifics?

I thought Shades answer kind of pointed towards the latter.
...where Bond's answer maybe leans towards the former...? (Well - a bit of the latter as well I guess...)

...would you say I'm reading you guys right? Or am I way off?

Post by **_The Nehor** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:53 pm

Problem is that 'liberal' now means two things. In the original meaning virtually everyone in the US is liberal.

The original meaning involves a preference for representative gov't and individual liberty.

The term that many Republicans use as a pejorative means: Socialist Pinko-commies bent on dismantling this great nation through forced economic equalization and lots of gay rights.

To actual liberals it refers to: Their individual beliefs on the role of government.

Post by **_skippy the dead** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:00 pm

Dr. Shades wrote:Yes, I'm quite sure Americans hear something quite different:

"Liberty:" Freedom, etc.
"Liberal:" Liberally spending your tax dollars.

Um, look at the last 7 years at who has been (over)spending our tax dollars. Those fellars 'taint liberals.

Post by **_Dr. Shades** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:43 pm

RenegadeOfPhunk wrote:OK - thanks for the replies.

What I'm trying to work out is: Are people against 'liberals' because they think they are for 'too much' liberty?

No.

Or is the word 'Liberal' simply a short-hand for a given social or political view, that can encompass all kinds of other specifics?

Yes.

skippy the dead wrote:Um, look at the last 7 years at who has been (over)spending our tax dollars. Those fellars 'taint liberals.

You know that and I know that, but the average American voter doesn't know that.

It's all who/what the money is being spent on, I guess.

Post by **_Doctor Steuss** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:45 pm

skippy the dead wrote:
Dr. Shades wrote:Yes, I'm quite sure Americans hear something quite different:

"Liberty:" Freedom, etc.
"Liberal:" Liberally spending your tax dollars.

Um, look at the last 7 years at who has been (over)spending our tax dollars. Those fellars 'taint liberals.

It's actually been going on a lot longer than 7 years, but I doubt wether any within the party remembers why they started overspending in the first place.

The original plan was to essentially bankrupt the government thus necessitating a stream-lining and institution of smaller government. Somehow I don't think a certain someone who is responsible for creating the largest bureaucratic institution in the history of the US had the end-goal in mind with his fiscal spending.

Post by **_Moniker** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:50 pm

Classical liberalism is very different from the term liberal today. Although many things that are liberal are progressive in nature it carries quite a bit of baggage from policy issues that are seen, by the many, as antithetic to individual freedoms.

Post by **_asbestosman** » Wed Jan 23, 2008 9:18 pm

The way I'd been raised, liberal was both shorthand for politics, and also a perjorative. The perjorative part of it is that liberals were tyring to permit evil (abortion, etc.). That is not to say that liberal was understood as one who permitted everything because I also understood liberals to be the sort who wanted to remove God from schools and keep Him out. Thus liberal did not refer exclusively to permissiveness.