This website is a member of Liberty Alliance, which has been named as an company.

Where Christianity intersects with politics, culture, and entertainment.


liberalism

Liberalism After Liberalism

Like other key words of American political and cultural discourse, the term liberalism suffers from a frustrating, even maddening, degree of ambiguity and imprecision in the way it is used. It can provoke heated arguments in which the disputants seem agreed in embracing liberalism, according it high and even talismanic qualities—but then go on to use it in such manifestly divergent ways that the ensuing discussion hardly rises to the level of a coherent disagreement. Something of the same confusion occurs among those who start out arm-in-arm as staunch opponents of liberalism but soon find it hard to agree on exactly what it is they are opposing, let alone what they are for, and even harder to ferret out the extent to which they may be presuming liberal tenets even in the act of challenging them.

One can complain about this incorrigible untidiness of our discourse, but the untidiness reflects the nature of political speech in a democracy, which even at its best combines a boisterous and unregulated vitality with a curious but persistent preoccupation with abstract words. We cannot do without such abstractions, since they are carriers of our highest ideals and aspirations. But inspiring words may also deceive, and the use of these words—such as change or hope or promise or fairness, not to say freedom and social justice—plays an essential role in the acts of cultural sleight-of-hand to which democracies are so notoriously prone.

Before discussing liberalism more fully, however, I have to say a few words about the term after. Even that simple preposition can be tricky. When we speak in terms of before and after, we invoke a very different set of considerations from those that obtain when we speak of for and against. The two sets of binary opposites may be compatible but they are not always the same, and sometimes they point in highly divergent directions. By introducing the medium of historical time, the former set of opposites allows for certain discriminations, and certain ambiguities.

Continue reading at www.firstthings.com
 
Posting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.
  • http://www.sargee5.blogspot.com The Watchman

    This article was one of the most masterful displays of gobbledygook I've ever read. An unending cacophony of written word with no premise, no point, no conclusion and a complete waste of time. God bless him for trying though. I think what the writer was attempting to say, could have been conveyed: There will always be liberal thoughts and ideas, not all will be bad. Then again, perhaps I completely missed the point. However, I will not subject myself to reading it over again, twice was certainly sufficient.

    • msjallen

      Thank you, I thought the same thing. We can read what the Bible says about the way liberals think and it is very clear:
      Isaiah 5:16-25

      • daves

        Me too. Nice fancy words there but difficult to comprehend.

      • http://www.sargee5.blogspot.com The Watchman

        Excellent msjallen.Great Bible reference.Thanks, I was hoping it wasn't just me.

      • Winston

        Isaiah 5:16-25
        "But the Lord of hosts is exalted in justice, and the Holy God shows himself holy in righteousness. Then shall the lambs graze as in their pasture, and nomads shall eat among the ruins of the rich. Woe to those who draw iniquity with cords of falsehood, who draw sin as with cart ropes, who say: “Let him be quick, let him speed his work that we may see it; let the counsel of the Holy One of Israel draw near, and let it come, that we may know it!” Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! …"

  • Winston

    The most outstanding statement in the article is the "old" understanding of what liberalism is/was. However, today, "old" Liberalism has been replaced by socialism, tolerance of all things evil, Marxism, and Communism. Liberal should indicate some semblance of "liberty" but with today's American Democrat political party it offers no liberty at all, because the centralized government is more of a dictatorship where the very, very few leaders tell you what you should believer and do because their distorted view of what is good and right are actually the absolute opposite of good and right. Liberalism today (again: socialism, tolerance of all things evil, Marxism, and Communism) is the work of Satan on earth and must be eradicated or we'll lose all of our rights, liberty, and freedom.

    • Chris

      Thank you for proving what I was about to say that Republicans use it as a swear word that they conflate with Communism, Hitler, Fascism and any other "Ism" that their tiny minds can come up with.

      In one sentence he says that Liberals want to exert total control and in another he says they want tolerance of all things evil. Sentences that have totally opposite meanings.

      Liberals are not pro evil. They are FOR people's rights and equal rights. They are not pro business anarchists like Republicans.

      • http://rationalresponses.blogspot.com/ Jeff Dixon

        Chris, how do you consider pro business people to be anarchists when you claim to work for a company that is pro business? At least, I assume your company wants to make money off the tech you develop?

      • Winston

        Chris apparently you fail to understand the meaning of the written word in context. And, either you are a flamining socialist/Marxist/communist or you are the prime example of the failed public school education in America. Now crawl back into your spider hole.

  • keyboardshark

    The word "liberal" when defined as "favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties" is a very fine concept. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal

    But it is modern political liberals, who believe in government controlling people's lives, rather than maximum individual freedom, that has given the word a bad connotation. Liberals control virtually every area of your life, whether you realize it or not.

    Need to mow your lawn? That lawn mower you are about to use has government-mandated features built into it that make it function less efficiently, or make it less convenient.

    "The government’s central plan for walk-behind mowers is mind boggling. That bar you have to squeeze and hold on the handle to make the wheel move? Mandated by government. That annoying plastic piece that covers the blow hole for the grass that you have to push out of the way? Mandated by government. The government has mandated the blueprint for the whole machine and thereby frozen its structure in place with an inferior and unalterable design.

    It is not enough that regulations have invaded the bathroom, ruined our showers and toilets, degraded our detergent, made it ever harder to unclog drains and made essential medicines hard to get. Now I find that regulations have even made it difficult for me to do something completely American like mow my own lawn!" http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/they-wrecked-our-m

    Same goes for washing machines, dishwashers, laundry detergent, shower heads, toilets, autos (boy, have they really meddled in the manufacture of autos) and the list goes on and on. And they plan to ban incandescent light bulbs very soon as well. Liberals in government who are trying to control every aspect of our lives "for our own good" are instead micromanaging everything we attempt to do, and are ruining our freedom to run our own lives as we see fit.

    • http://rationalresponses.blogspot.com/ Jeff Dixon

      Those are very good points about why the liberal point of view is wrong.

      • keyboardshark

        I thought so too, but I am just waiting for some liberal apologist to come along and disagree.

        • Winston

          Give "Chris" a chance… he'll find fault with it as soon as he reads it.

          • keyboardshark

            Yes, he will probably tell us how "safe" government has made everything for us.

  • Tommy

    The filthy libs are evil and they're sicko mental ill people. It's a fact.