Demonizing the word liberal

[Callous]

I think too many people see compassion as meaning a free ride. I do have a problem with people who play the system for self satisfaction. But I also have a problem with ignoring the problem.
I look at it this way. I’m liberal enough to be accepting or understanding of situations but conservative enough to myself to be helpful when needed.

 

[Booko]

I'd like to see a repeat offender after capital punishment has been dished out. Now let's see if we can see the same results after 12 step programs.

I thought FlappyCat was referring to the mentally ill we lock up in prisons sometimes. 12 step programs are hardly the sort of treatment I'd expect for them.

I've long thought we need to rethink our system of dealing with those who commit dangerous crimes. We're really in the dark ages in some ways. We don't recognize the possibility that someone might be seriously mentally ill, and therefore should be kept away from society, but putting them in a mental institution and giving them some lithium might be more appropriate than sticking them in prison as if they were just someone who made bad choices in life.

I don't have a problem with food stamps. I do have a problem with able bodied people getting cheap housing and a check just cause they had a few kids and they didn't want to bother learning any trade.

I work in a city that is not in the best of shape. I drive by a government housing community every single day and I'm never ceased to be amazed at the kind of cars these people drive. I swear on my mothers grave the one house has a fairly new white Dodge Durango with 22" rims parked out front.

Yes, that was controversial back in the 70s as well. What the white people who complained about it then didn't know was that often those "welfare cadillacs" were owned by as many as a dozen families, and it was the only decent thing they owned, and they all shared it. The reason they didn't get "welfare datsuns" was because they couldn't fit the parents, grandparents and couple of kids and probably their elderly auntie in such a tiny car. The only reason I'd have any idea is because I lived in the neighborhood.

Whether that's true of the Durango you saw or not, who knows. It could just as well be the result of savings from selling illegal drugs, for all I know. Things have changed rather dramatically in that regard over the past few decades.

I live near a public assisstance housing complex. I don't see any fancy cars there, except the odd one there for a visit sometimes. I just see a lot of people working 2-3 jobs and struggling to keep afloat.

By contrast, up the street there's the apartment complex that isn't public assistance. They have a $99 move in special. Wow, when they started that, the school changed, like overnight. :cover: We were all delighted to see the special dropped.

The people in the public assisstance housing -- they know how easy it is to get the boot from what little they have, and they make sure their kids behave.

 

[lilithu]

I look at it this way. I’m liberal enough to be accepting or understanding of situations but conservative enough to myself to be helpful when needed.

That's an interesting statement Callous. It seems to me that we all mean different things by the term liberal and conservative and in some ways are talking past each other. What do those words mean to you?

 

[Booko]

I think too many people see compassion as meaning a free ride. I do have a problem with people who play the system for self satisfaction. But I also have a problem with ignoring the problem.
I look at it this way. I’m liberal enough to be accepting or understanding of situations but conservative enough to myself to be helpful when needed.

Good points.

I'm conservative in the sense that I don't think money solves all problems, and where it can help, can we kindly be efficient and effective with it??

I'm liberal in the sense that I know too darned well how people can end up with nothing through no bad choices of their own, and I think we should offer people tools to work their way back up.

Plus, I don't think it's in our own interest to have people be dirt poor. I'd much rather see people be contributing to society than be in such a hopeless situation that they think crime is more profitable.

 

[Flappycat]

I'd like to see a repeat offender after capital punishment has been dished out. Now let's see if we can see the same results after 12 step programs.

Too bad. You're palpably wrong, and you've probably seen all the statistical and scientific evidence against your views.

I don't have a problem with food stamps. I do have a problem with able bodied people getting cheap housing and a check just cause they had a few kids and they didn't want to bother learning any trade.

The housing is a necessity. It's hard to truly go hungry in a country in which you can get fat eating out of garbage cans, but staying out of the weather is a bit harder to do. Particularly in harsher climates, you'd be no better than a murderer not to support it. The only criticism that I can think of for it is that the current system is not managed as economically as it should be. People don't need a great deal of room to stay out of the rain; heating, air, insulation, running water, and access to emergency services is all one really needs, and anything else should be sacrificed for the sake of either cutting costs or improving access to employers and job training facilities.

I work in a city that is not in the best of shape.

Must have a conservative running the show. Fire him, and hire on someone who promises more than tax cuts.

I drive by a government housing community every single day and I'm never ceased to be amazed at the kind of cars these people drive.

Because it's really easy to find a good job you can get to on foot, right?

I swear on my mothers grave the one house has a fairly new white Dodge Durango with 22" rims parked out front.

So the only people who become poor are those who have a sound sense of priorities. Do you think that people who know how to budget and invest their money tend to become poor? If not enough people know how to do this, there is a problem with the education system. If you have a problem with the kinds of cars these people are driving, merely prohibit any vehicle that doesn't qualify as a resource for commuting from being parked on the grounds.

Welfare should be abolished, it is NOT helping anyone, just giving people excuses to suck from the Gov. tit.

So? We can afford it, and, meanwhile, let's spend more on providing our youth with an education that will leave them equipped and willing to commit themselves to a career.

 

[Callous]

That's an interesting statement Callous. It seems to me that we all mean different things by the term liberal and conservative and in some ways are talking past each other. What do those words mean to you?

Liberal ……. I’m 56 soon to be 57, I am a product of the 60’s, Vietnam and hippies along with the religious background I have already covered. I guess for me liberal means not being close minded to options.
Conservative… I think I covered by my earlier statement. If I can not help myself how do I help others. Not only finically but spiritually a well.
As far as politics goes I’m more or less a Constitutionalist. I find my voting going to neither the Dem’s or Repub’s exclusively and find a lot of good in independents.

 

[Valjean]

The US, as a radical experiment in liberal government, is a product of liberal philosophy of The Enlightenment (Google).

All of the movements and ideas later acknowledged to be milestones in human progress were Liberal ideas.

The Social Contract -- leaders subservient to and chosen to support the interests of the ordinary citizens is a liberal idea.

Meritocracy vs rigid class structure, Freedom of speech, Freedom of the press, Freedom of religion, Freedom to assemble, freedom to petition the government for redress of grievances, Freedom to remove officials not serving the interests of the people, Freedom to elect our own leaders -- all radical, liberal ideas.

Emancipation of the slaves; of women, universal suffrage, the eight-hour day, the minimum wage, labor unions, "welfare," prison reform, universal education, the right to health care (work-in-progress), the G-I Bill, clean air and water regulations, -- all liberal ideas railed against by the "conservatives" of the day. Today's Republicans and right-wing talk-show hosts would have denounced them all ex cathedra.

The US was founded as, and is intended to be, an experiment in Extreme Liberalism.
Those who oppose liberalism are thus, by definition, anti-American.

Liberals are idealists. Liberals are those who seek to create a society in accord with the (liberal) teachings of Jesus Christ.

Read a history book and you're reading a saga of human (liberal/progressive) progress; a story of the struggle of liberalism against the dark forces of conservatism.

It's a wonder to me that right-wing conservatives don't burst into flame at the touch of the United States flag -- or the Holy Bible, for that matter.

 

[lilithu]

The US, as a radical experiment in liberal government, is a product of liberal philosophy of The Enlightenment (Google).

All of the movements and ideas later acknowledged to be milestones in human progress were Liberal ideas.

The Social Contract -- leaders subservient to and chosen to support the interests of the ordinary citizens is a liberal idea.

Meritocracy vs rigid class structure, Freedom of speech, Freedom of the press, Freedom of religion, Freedom to assemble, freedom to petition the government for redress of grievances, Freedom to remove officials not serving the interests of the people, Freedom to elect our own leaders -- all radical, liberal ideas.

Emancipation of the slaves; of women, universal suffrage, the eight-hour day, the minimum wage, labor unions, "welfare," prison reform, universal education, the right to health care (work-in-progress), the G-I Bill, clean air and water regulations, -- all liberal ideas railed against by the "conservatives" of the day. Today's Republicans and right-wing talk-show hosts would have denounced them all ex cathedra.

The US was founded as, and is intended to be, an experiment in Extreme Liberalism.
Those who oppose liberalism are thus, by definition, anti-American.

Liberals are idealists. Liberals are those who seek to create a society in accord with the (liberal) teachings of Jesus Christ.

Read a history book and you're reading a saga of human (liberal/progressive) progress; a story of the struggle of liberalism against the dark forces of conservatism.

It's a wonder to me that right-wing conservatives don't burst into flame at the touch of the United States flag -- or the Holy Bible, for that matter.

Awesome. :jam:

 

[PureX]

I was watching the Network News, as I do every day when there's nothing else on, when I found another loud-mouth on FOX News boiling over about some "liberal" (I'll give you a hint, his first name starts with a B and there's an apostrophe in his last). The guest he had on was in agreement with the term, and right afterwards declared himself a normal conservative...

Since when was calling someone a liberal, who is liberal, an insult? Is there some double-standard on network news about it being okay to call yourself a conservative, but not a liberal? I ask this because even shows like Olbermann barely touch on the word.

Yes, I noticed this morning on the talking head shows that the liberals are now using the term "progressives" to refer to themselves, presumably because the term "liberal" has become some sort of slander.

What a bunch of sissies. I think they should proclaim their liberalism loud and proud instead of opting for new terms. But what do I know, I'm a SOCIALIST!

 

[Valjean]

Yes, I noticed this morning on the talking head shows that the liberals are now using the term "progressives" to refer to themselves, presumably because the term "liberal" has become some sort of slander.

What a bunch of sissies. I think they should proclaim their liberalism loud and proud instead of opting for new terms. But what do I know, I'm a SOCIALIST!

"Liberalism" and "progressivism" are overlapping Venns. We use one or the other depending on our intended focus. We are both.

I'm no sissy. We are, as always, the avant garde.
I'm proud to be a member of the dreaded ACLU, Amnesty International, Union of Concerned Scientists and a half-dozen other liberal organizations.
(I'm not technically 'card-carrying' only inasmuch as the cards were cluttering up my wallet and were useless in ATMs or stores, so I discarded them).

 

[Pah]

When someone is out-classed, intimadated, or otherwise beaten by a group, demonization is a frequent fall-back to restore some dignity.

 

[doppelganger]

"Progressive" is hardly a new designation for modern liberals either - though the two aren't identical. One of the largest and most important liberal movements in American history was the "Progressive" movement at the turn of the Twentieth Century that brought about the "Food and Drug Administration" the National Parks system, and the end of child labor among many other awesome things.

More on progressivism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_movement

 

[lilithu]

"Liberalism" and "progressivism" are overlapping Venns. We use one or the other depending on our intended focus. We are both.

Die-hard libs like us may use both. (Actually, I only use liberal.) But I agree with PureX that most politicians have dropped the word liberal like the plague and instead call themselves progressive. And again I ask, are you just noticing this now? It's been going on for over a decade! The first time I had the word 'liberal' thrown at me in what was clearly meant to be an insult, I was confused. I'm like, "uh yeah, so? Of course I'm a liberal and proud of it." That was in the early 90's. And when I look back in history, I agree with NetDoc that the assault on the word liberal began with Reagan, increased with Bush I until now, there are people who's views coincide largely with mine and yet they say, "Oh, I'm not a liberal" with disdain. As if it's something to be ashamed of.

From John F. Kennedy:
What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."

Amen brother! :jam: Preach it!

http://www.cjnetworks.com/~cubsfan/whatis.html

I'm no sissy. We are, as always, the avant garde.
I'm proud to support the dreaded ACLU, Amnesty International, Union of Concerned Scientists and a half-dozen other liberal organizations.
(I'm not technically 'card-carrying' only inasmuch as the cards were cluttering up my wallet and were useless in ATMs or stores, so I discarded them).

Honestly, I kinda took the ACLU for granted until Bush I attacked it. When he accused Mike Dukakis of being a card-carrying member, my jaw dropped open. In what universe is caring to protect our civil liberties something to be ashamed of? I registered the next day and have been a member ever since. And I've heard since then that they got a huge boost in membership following that debate.

And yeah, Amnesty, Human Rights Watch, UCS, PFAW, move-on, Americans United for the Seperation of Church and State, Interfaith Alliance...

Seyorni, if you're not a member of TIA you should look into it. It's become one of my favorite organizations!

http://www.interfaithalliance.org/site/pp.asp?c=8dJIIWMCE&b=447561

 

[Callous]

The US, as a radical experiment in liberal government, is a product of liberal philosophy of The Enlightenment (Google).

All of the movements and ideas later acknowledged to be milestones in human progress were Liberal ideas.

The Social Contract -- leaders subservient to and chosen to support the interests of the ordinary citizens is a liberal idea.

Meritocracy vs rigid class structure, Freedom of speech, Freedom of the press, Freedom of religion, Freedom to assemble, freedom to petition the government for redress of grievances, Freedom to remove officials not serving the interests of the people, Freedom to elect our own leaders -- all radical, liberal ideas.

Emancipation of the slaves; of women, universal suffrage, the eight-hour day, the minimum wage, labor unions, "welfare," prison reform, universal education, the right to health care (work-in-progress), the G-I Bill, clean air and water regulations, -- all liberal ideas railed against by the "conservatives" of the day. Today's Republicans and right-wing talk-show hosts would have denounced them all ex cathedra.

The US was founded as, and is intended to be, an experiment in Extreme Liberalism.
Those who oppose liberalism are thus, by definition, anti-American.

Liberals are idealists. Liberals are those who seek to create a society in accord with the (liberal) teachings of Jesus Christ.

Read a history book and you're reading a saga of human (liberal/progressive) progress; a story of the struggle of liberalism against the dark forces of conservatism.

It's a wonder to me that right-wing conservatives don't burst into flame at the touch of the United States flag -- or the Holy Bible, for that matter.

Funny I never concidered Jesus as a liberal. Compassionate yes. Extreem passion yes.
but never a liberal.

 

[Callous]

The US, as a radical experiment in liberal government, is a product of liberal philosophy of The Enlightenment (Google).

All of the movements and ideas later acknowledged to be milestones in human progress were Liberal ideas.

The Social Contract -- leaders subservient to and chosen to support the interests of the ordinary citizens is a liberal idea.

Meritocracy vs rigid class structure, Freedom of speech, Freedom of the press, Freedom of religion, Freedom to assemble, freedom to petition the government for redress of grievances, Freedom to remove officials not serving the interests of the people, Freedom to elect our own leaders -- all radical, liberal ideas.

Emancipation of the slaves; of women, universal suffrage, the eight-hour day, the minimum wage, labor unions, "welfare," prison reform, universal education, the right to health care (work-in-progress), the G-I Bill, clean air and water regulations, -- all liberal ideas railed against by the "conservatives" of the day. Today's Republicans and right-wing talk-show hosts would have denounced them all ex cathedra.

The US was founded as, and is intended to be, an experiment in Extreme Liberalism.
Those who oppose liberalism are thus, by definition, anti-American.

Liberals are idealists. Liberals are those who seek to create a society in accord with the (liberal) teachings of Jesus Christ.

Read a history book and you're reading a saga of human (liberal/progressive) progress; a story of the struggle of liberalism against the dark forces of conservatism.

It's a wonder to me that right-wing conservatives don't burst into flame at the touch of the United States flag -- or the Holy Bible, for that matter.

I never concidered Jesus as a liberal as in anti conservative. Comassionate yes, extreem passion in belief. he was in fact actually very set in his belief so much as to reject all others that my chalange him.

 

[doppelganger]

I never concidered Jesus as a liberal as in anti conservative. Comassionate yes, extreem passion in belief. he was in fact actually very set in his belief so much as to reject all others that my chalange him.

The Jesus character in the New Testament is a liberal archetype. He is an iconoclast who teaches non-violence and elevation of love, forgiveness and self-sacrifice as higher values than tradition or dogma. He hangs out with those society rejects. He challenges both the religious and political establishment and is put to death for blasphemy.

 

[doppelganger]

Here's an article I wrote about recent research that offers insight into the essential difference between "liberals" and "conservatives."

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=40011

 

[lilithu]

I never concidered Jesus as a liberal as in anti conservative. Comassionate yes, extreem passion in belief. he was in fact actually very set in his belief so much as to reject all others that my chalange him.

I asked you previously what you mean by 'liberal' and you said: "I guess for me liberal means not being close minded to options."

And my reaction to that would be, yeah but why are liberals not close-minded to options? What is the underlying premise that leads to that behavior?

If you look at the things that Seyorni mentioned: the Enlightenment, the basis for our Constitution, the abolition of slavery, suffrage for women, the social reforms of the Progressive movement and the civil rights movement... what is the underlying feature that unites all of them? It is the expansion of human rights and human liberties and the promotion of human well-being where before they had been subjugated to either church, king, social convention or the biases of the majority.

Liberalism is humanism. It is the belief that humans have intrinsic worth that cannot be violated whether for reasons of ideology or expediency. If is the belief that humans have the innate capacity for good that can only be realized if they are given the freedom to pursue their consciences instead of being constrained. Because of that, we are open-minded to many options.

Being open to many options does NOT mean being open to everything. If liberals were open to everything, then slavery would still exist because we would not have been able to stand up and say that it was wrong. Women still would not be allowed to vote. Racial segregation would still be the law. To be liberal means to allow freedom and diversity, but it also means to oppose those things with violate human worth and dignity. Because liberalism is based in humanism, we cannot have one without the other. To be liberal is to be dead set against those forces that violate humanism.

Now as for Jesus:

What did he teach? "Love thy neighbor as you love yourself."

Who did Jesus think was your neighbor? Even your enemy is your neighbor.

What did Jesus oppose?
The marginalization of the poor, and sick, and social outcasts. He hung out with lepers, prostitutes, and tax-collectors (who were social outcasts). He said, "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are the those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be filled. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God." Jesus preached a radical message of inclusivity and love.

What also did Jesus oppose?
The subjugation of human welfare to the law. He said that laws were made to serve man and not men to serve the law.

As much as he loved God, Jesus was a humanist. The two are not at odds with each other. The two greatest commandments: "Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and all thy mind and all thy soul" and "Love thy neighbor as you love yourself."

Jesus was a humanist. Jesus was a liberal.

 

[mattlevan]

Wow. Well said, lilithu.

Amen, brothers and sisters!

 

[Callous]

I asked you previously what you mean by 'liberal' and you said: "I guess for me liberal means not being close minded to options."

And my reaction to that would be, yeah but why are liberals not close-minded to options? What is the underlying premise that leads to that behavior?

If you look at the things that Seyorni mentioned: the Enlightenment, the basis for our Constitution, the abolition of slavery, suffrage for women, the social reforms of the Progressive movement and the civil rights movement... what is the underlying feature that unites all of them? It is the expansion of human rights and human liberties and the promotion of human well-being where before they had been subjugated to either church, king, social convention or the biases of the majority.

Liberalism is humanism. It is the belief that humans have intrinsic worth that cannot be violated whether for reasons of ideology or expediency. If is the belief that humans have the innate capacity for good that can only be realized if they are given the freedom to pursue their consciences instead of being constrained. Because of that, we are open-minded to many options.

Being open to many options does NOT mean being open to everything. If liberals were open to everything, then slavery would still exist because we would not have been able to stand up and say that it was wrong. Women still would not be allowed to vote. Racial segregation would still be the law. To be liberal means to allow freedom and diversity, but it also means to oppose those things with violate human worth and dignity. Because liberalism is based in humanism, we cannot have one without the other. To be liberal is to be dead set against those forces that violate humanism.

Now as for Jesus:

What did he teach? "Love thy neighbor as you love yourself."

Who did Jesus think was your neighbor? Even your enemy is your neighbor.

What did Jesus oppose?
The marginalization of the poor, and sick, and social outcasts. He hung out with lepers, prostitutes, and tax-collectors (who were social outcasts). He said, "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are the those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be filled. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God." Jesus preached a radical message of inclusivity and love.

What also did Jesus oppose?
The subjugation of human welfare to the law. He said that laws were made to serve man and not men to serve the law.

As much as he loved God, Jesus was a humanist. The two are not at odds with each other. The two greatest commandments: "Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and all thy mind and all thy soul" and "Love thy neighbor as you love yourself."

Jesus was a humanist. Jesus was a liberal.

I would have to agree with your earlier statement that liberalism is seen differently by different people and we tend to talk past each other.
My being open minded to different options and or solutions by no means mean that I accept every option that I see. They are merely options, choices that I use my own sense of morality to rectify. Without a knowledge of the options my views would be hobbled.
I would agree that Jesus was a humanist in considering views on taking care of all. But that information is based on a 2000 year old interpretation of not his words but the words the Disciples wrote.
I know from experience that you can teach people what you know and when they report on it, it is mostly interpretations of what they thought they heard. Now I’m by no means saying or calling anyone of the Disciples writings wrong, lies or misinterpretations but there are other documents from Rome, Greece, Egypt and France to name a few that also talk about the teachings of Jesus and the Disciples. It would be wrong in not concidering these writings as well.
I still do not consider Jesus as being anti-conservative. He did chose to live a meager life and conservative does not equate to money or station in life. I think that falls in the political arena.