« Bay Area New Democrats Protest DeLay. Again | Main | The "Front Groups" protecting your family »
March 31, 2005
I'm 'liberal'. Is that wrong?
As Democrats we are accustomed to being called liberal all the time by Republicans, so much so, the media commonly use the Republican meaning of liberal, which generally implies moral abandon, high taxes and big government, and secularity.
I just have to ask, "Why is being liberal bad, wrong, subversive, or as some imply: un-American." Since I figure most people who use the word probably don't really know what 'liberal' means, and I am a unsure myself, I reach for my dictionary.
According to the American Heritage Dictionary, liberal is an adjective that means:
1a. Not limited to or by traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes or dogmas; free from bigotry.
Well, that doesn't sound too bad. As children, we were generally urged to try knew things. Education and traveling help broaden our understanding of the world and our place in it. Tradition implies a heritage and culture that each one of us passes to the next generation as our ancestors taught us. While traditions, values, and religion can influence our actions, as liberals we are not limited to them and can grow from our beliefs and way of life. In so doing, we become something new and ideally something more than what we were before.
We are taught to question facts and established beliefs, religious or otherwise, not because we're trying to be subversive, but because the accepted way of operating may not necessarily be the best way. It is dangerous to believe unquestioningly in authoritative dogmas. Individuality with an understanding of some sort of common identity within society is important to the overall functioning of society. Bigotry should be avoided and as a liberal, we are open to new ideas, even radical ones. However, before acting upon them, we carefully evaluate the pros and cons to the best of our ability to help ensure that society benefits as a whole, not just ourselves.
I guess that means liberals don't try to legislate what goes on in the bedroom, that we should be free to make our own personal life choices with the full protection of our civil and human rights. We leave women to decide the fate of their bodies. We accept that other religions exist, and that if we chose to believe in God (or in a different god or gods) that all religions essentially acknowledge the existence of a higher being(s), but do so in their own unique ways.
1b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
Logically as part of being open to new ideas, we accept and even welcome reform. Reform entails abolishing abuse and malpractice, to improve, correct errors, remove defects, and to leave the system in a better condition than in which we found it. In fact, liberal actually implies tolerance of the beliefs, practices, or traits of others, even forbearance (tolerance, patience, restraint in the face of provocation). Additionally, a tolerant person is one who has a capacity for or the practice of recognizing and respecting the beliefs or practices of others. One who is broad-minded shows an inclination to respect views different from one’s own.
I don't know about you, but these traits don't sound very immoral or like reckless subversiveness to me.
1c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
Well, liberalism means the state or quality of being liberal, so that can't be too bad.
1d. Of, being, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism.
As long as the party maintains the qualities of being liberal that's not bad either.
2a. Tending to give freely; generous.
Well, let's see, generous can mean liberal in giving in sharing. It can mean nobility and forbearance in thought or behavior, being magnanimous (courageously noble in mind and heart, generous in forgiving, unselfish, eschewing resentment and revenge.)
As long as that means serving families, not the narrow interests of wealthy individuals and corporations, and working with citizens from all regions and all walks of life, I can't find anything wrong with that. If generosity is providing quality education to all, universal access to quality health care and child care, affordable insurance, prescription drug coverage, and rewarding honest hard work with a livable wage and tax system that is fair to all taxpayers, I can't dispute any of those either. How can someone dispute the morality of preserving natural resources, clean air and water in order to provide a better quality of life and a safe environment for our children? If generosity is providing American workers and businesses, particularly small businesses, the basic infrastructure and advanced technology required to succeed in a changing economy instead of sending jobs overseas that sounds good to me. Sharing the right to freedom from government interference in our private lives and personal decisions and full protection of civil and human rights doesn't sound like moral abandon. The ability to accomplish these tasks while maintaining fiscal responsibility actually makes us liberals sound like we are conservative in the sense of being moderate.
2b. Generous in amount; ample.
As long as this refers to the values above, it sounds good to me.
3. Not strict or literal; loose or approximate.
If not seeing an issue literally, not only in black and white, but from several perspectives seems like a good trait to have. If being loose or approximate means that we are not held to one way of rigidly doing things and able to adapt to changing circumstances, I'm for it.
4. Of, relating to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or university curriculum.
If the college or university promotes free-thinking, self-worth, while being aware of other people's values and ideas, that sounds fine too.
Actually the obsolete meaning of liberal might describe certain Republicans.
5b. Obsolete. Morally unrestrained; licentious.
A licentious person is one who lacks moral discipline or ignores legal restraint, and has no regard for accepted rules or standards. I'll leave it up to you to decide to whom or to those this might apply.
Futhermore, liberal shares the same Latin root (liber) with liberate and liberty. I can’t disagree with those, although it is absolutely preferable that liberty not be handed out on the end of a bayonet. If it must come by force, then it must be absolutely clear that all other measures were pursued to their fullest extent and that the reasons for force are transparent and honorable as well as well-founded.
We need to accept being liberal. Liberal is not wrong or bad or "un-American." Honestly, how can we really ever be truly un-American if we support the First Amendment? I think Republicans have been allowed to co-opt and demonize the meaning of liberal. If we do not speak up and support liberal values, then in a sense we are complicit in allowing others to define what it means and our personal beliefs. I think it would be helpful for self-proclaimed Republicans to see just how many liberals there are in society, and how many of them they might actually call their friends. I know I have surprised some people with the fact that I am liberal and they accept that. Whether or not someone agrees with liberal values, we must be able to fully articulate why we believe in them and stake a claim to our share of the moral pie.
I actually learned something about the meaning of liberal from reading the dictionary. Although, I would not recommend it as bed time reading, I hope that laying out the definitions of liberal helps to vindicate the values, morals, and ideology of being a liberal person.
So remember the next time someone calls you liberal, just smile and nod, and tell them "thank you." Living life liberally really is a great thing.
To get involved with the Harris County Democratic Party click here.
Click here to read the Texas Democratic Platform. Oh, I should mention that it is liberal, but not necessarily the final word on the values we support. It's always open for discussion and improvement for society's benefit.
Posted by at March 31, 2005 01:45 AM | Permalink
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.houstondemocrats.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/81
Comments
The problem with calling yourself liberal -- as with using the conservative label -- is that it actually undermines successful communication, unless your goal is to confuse. Call yourself liberal and you mean one thing, but is that the same thing that others call it? Not too often; in fact, I hear people argue all the time about what "liberal" or "progressive" or "populist" means. Citing a dictionary definition helps not at all, since they tend to use historical rather than current definitions. These arguments are pointless; no one can win.
I have been called both liberal and conservative. In each case, the caller was using himself/herself as the sole frame of reference. How useful is that?
Better to focus on specific issues, events, and candidates, and let the labels fall where they belong, on the trash heap of history.
Posted by: Dale Napier at March 31, 2005 10:20 AM
I agree. The other side can call me what they want with all the contempt they can muster - the more the better - because it means they have a problem and it ultimately draws attention to the real issues.
Posted by: Charles Hixon at April 1, 2005 11:32 AM