What is liberalism?
 

A little while back, I asked conservatives to explain the ideas behind conservatism. They responded quickly and with a lot of background.

Now, I'd like conservatives to do me another favor. What is liberalism? Where did it come from?

Again, I'm not looking for policy proposals (like free healthcare or anti-death penalty) but the basic underlining ideological foundations of modern liberalism.

Re: What is liberalism?
 

Modern conservatism: oppress people overseas

Modern liberalism: oppress people domestically

Most people want to do both. They're "libocons."

Re: What is liberalism?
 

Please explain how liberalism oppresses people in the US?

Liberals want more freedom, not less. Look at the "war on drugs" or the DoD program of spying on peaceful americans for example: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10454316/

Re: What is liberalism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Modern conservatism: oppress people overseas

Modern liberalism: oppress people domestically

Most people want to do both.

[/ QUOTE ]

I will let liberals speak for themselves, but most conservatives do not want to oppress anyone. They do want to defend themselves against crime and foreign terror.

Its too bad that pvn considers self-defense to be oppression, he seems to have gotten led astray a bit.

Re: What is liberalism?
 

This is a Bill Hicks quote that sums up how most liberals feel. If you are a Christian Conservative, close your eyes and pray:
"My final point about alchohol, about drugs, about Pornography...What business is it of your's what I do, read, buy, see or take into my body as long as I don't harm another human being whilst on this planet? And for those of you having a little moral dilemna on how to answer this, I'll answer for you. NONE OF YOUR [censored] BUSINESS Take that to the bank, cash it and take it on a vacation outta my [censored] life. "

Re: What is liberalism?
 

I assume pvn is a libetarian?

Re: What is liberalism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I assume pvn is a libetarian?

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe he is a libertarian with a persecution complex. He seems to think everybody is out there oppressing everybody. I guess he sees himself as the innocent victim being oppressed by all them non-libertarians out there. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: What is liberalism?
 

Part of modern liberalisms current weakness is that it has no idealogical base. It is often seen as a grab bag of individual policy proposals that aren't necessarily threaded togethor. This is why many of the individual policy proposals often contradict eachother, change radically over time, or are fundamentally faulty.

One could say that the fundamental tenant of liberalism is that an enlightened committee of experts can make better policy decisions then the public and that the government should have sweeping powers so that those decisions can be carried out.

What these enlightened individuals believe often changes from issue to issue, and as such it appears like a grab bag of specific policy initiatives.

As someone else said, conservatives tend to start with universal principles and then apply them to specific policy situations, while liberals tend to think of solutions to specific policy challenges without linking those solutions togethor in a fundamental way or understanding how they effect one another. In other words, conservatives try to answer all the questions at once and liberals try to do them all seperately.

As such people think conservatives lack finese and deep analysis while people think liberals are too complicated and lose sight of basic principles (which inevitably makes them contradict themselves).

Re: What is liberalism?
 

On social issues they are often against free speech (remember, most liberals aren't the ACLU, but rather come down on anyone that says anything "offensive").

On economic issues the sky is the limit.

Then again, I don't know why we divide economics and social, as they are integrated pretty closely in my life.

Re: What is liberalism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Modern conservatism: oppress people overseas

Modern liberalism: oppress people domestically

Most people want to do both.

[/ QUOTE ]

I will let liberals speak for themselves, but most conservatives do not want to oppress anyone. They do want to defend themselves against crime and foreign terror.

Its too bad that pvn considers self-defense to be oppression, he seems to have gotten led astray a bit.

[/ QUOTE ]

Going out and killing 30k Iraqis (and 2k Americans) sure has a lot to do with "defense." That doesn't matter though, because the life of one American is worth that of many foreigners. After all, they were born outside of the jurisdiction of the US government. Additionally, the funds used in these endeavors are obtained by means of force, thus oppressing people domestically.

Oh, conservatives also oppress people domestically by denying them of several personal freedoms (although 'liberals' so this too).

Re: What is liberalism?
 

So it's better to approach problems with a answer already in mind? Or is it better have an open mind and try to adapt to the situation?

If the answer is always 5, it's sort of hard to adapt when the question is 2+2. Does this logic apply to politics or can illogical assumptions govern a society?

Re: What is liberalism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Please explain how liberalism oppresses people in the US?

Liberals want more freedom, not less. Look at the "war on drugs" or the DoD program of spying on peaceful americans for example: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10454316/

[/ QUOTE ]

It is simple. People are forced to relinquish funds against their will in order to contribute to the "liberal" welfare state, otherwise they will be thrown in jail. Are you saying that extortion is not oppression?

Re: What is liberalism?
 

“Liberalism” was a term first ascribed to and advanced by a variety of enlightenment thinkers who pushed for greater political and (later) economic rights. The economic ideas advanced by 19th century liberal philosophers would today be associated with the political right. But these ideas in their more extreme forms were only briefly actually enunciated by the “liberal” parties that emerged in many Western European countries in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, however, and very rarely (perhaps never) in the context of fully democratic regimes.

In Europe, where working class political movements emerged earliest and most forcefully, “liberalism” quickly became a term to describe the political center, with conservatives and nationalists on the right and socialists, communists, and social democrats on the left. Sometimes, such as in 19th century England, liberals were able to coopt labor movements, resulting in the political coalition often termed “lib-labism.”

In the US, “liberalism” was first a term that also described the political center. For the first half of the 20th century, a “liberal consensus” of Keynesian centrism regarding economic matters characterized American politics. With the rise of conservativism in the post-war period, liberalism eventually became a term associated with “leftist” politics, although it was very similar to the centrist “liberalism” of Europe.

In Latin America, “liberalism” was a term that generally described political movements that wanted to commercialize agriculture and embrace more democratic politics in the 19th century. When the rise of the working classes spawned other movements and countermovements in the 20th century, the “liberals” often were left as the political alternative on the right. Thus, liberalism in Latin America to this day has connotations of right-wing politics, and the marketization of Latin American economies in the last generation is often termed “neoliberalism.”

Re: What is liberalism?
 

Good response. Where does social democracy fit into all of this?

Re: What is liberalism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
“Liberalism” was a term first ascribed to and advanced by a variety of enlightenment thinkers who pushed for greater political and (later) economic rights. The economic ideas advanced by 19th century liberal philosophers would today be associated with the political right. But these ideas in their more extreme forms were only briefly actually enunciated by the “liberal” parties that emerged in many Western European countries in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, however, and very rarely (perhaps never) in the context of fully democratic regimes.

In Europe, where working class political movements emerged earliest and most forcefully, “liberalism” quickly became a term to describe the political center, with conservatives and nationalists on the right and socialists, communists, and social democrats on the left. Sometimes, such as in 19th century England, liberals were able to coopt labor movements, resulting in the political coalition often termed “lib-labism.”

In the US, “liberalism” was first a term that also described the political center. For the first half of the 20th century, a “liberal consensus” of Keynesian centrism regarding economic matters characterized American politics. With the rise of conservativism in the post-war period, liberalism eventually became a term associated with “leftist” politics, although it was very similar to the centrist “liberalism” of Europe.

In Latin America, “liberalism” was a term that generally described political movements that wanted to commercialize agriculture and embrace more democratic politics in the 19th century. When the rise of the working classes spawned other movements and countermovements in the 20th century, the “liberals” often were left as the political alternative on the right. Thus, liberalism in Latin America to this day has connotations of right-wing politics, and the marketization of Latin American economies in the last generation is often termed “neoliberalism.”

[/ QUOTE ]

THIS is the right answer for the most part.

For some more background, liberalism stems from the writings of Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rosseau, John Stuart Mill, etc. In the most basic terms, liberalism basically means that the government's only role is to protect the citizens of whatever territory, and that is IT. In the beginning, that basically meant to only protect the citizenry from physical harm from foreign enemies and domestic criminals. As time went on, there were different interpretations for what "protecting the people from harm" meant, and that is how the questions of morality and economic intrusion by the government came to be.

There seems to be some confusion about this matter in this country. BOTH Democrats and Republicans are LIBERALS, they simply interpret what 'protecting the citizenry' means in different ways. Democrats simply cherish modern liberalism when it comes to the economic realm, and classical liberalism in the social realm. It is the other way around for Republicans. Liberterians would be the hard-core classical liberals and Communitarian (or whatever you want to call THOSE people), believe in government intrusion in everything.

I personally get annoyed when people badmouth liberals, and not realize that the only reason they can say any of it is because they live with a liberal system of government.

Re: What is liberalism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
“Liberalism” was a term first ascribed to and advanced by a variety of enlightenment thinkers who pushed for greater political and (later) economic rights. The economic ideas advanced by 19th century liberal philosophers would today be associated with the political right. But these ideas in their more extreme forms were only briefly actually enunciated by the “liberal” parties that emerged in many Western European countries in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, however, and very rarely (perhaps never) in the context of fully democratic regimes.

In Europe, where working class political movements emerged earliest and most forcefully, “liberalism” quickly became a term to describe the political center, with conservatives and nationalists on the right and socialists, communists, and social democrats on the left. Sometimes, such as in 19th century England, liberals were able to coopt labor movements, resulting in the political coalition often termed “lib-labism.”

In the US, “liberalism” was first a term that also described the political center. For the first half of the 20th century, a “liberal consensus” of Keynesian centrism regarding economic matters characterized American politics. With the rise of conservativism in the post-war period, liberalism eventually became a term associated with “leftist” politics, although it was very similar to the centrist “liberalism” of Europe.

In Latin America, “liberalism” was a term that generally described political movements that wanted to commercialize agriculture and embrace more democratic politics in the 19th century. When the rise of the working classes spawned other movements and countermovements in the 20th century, the “liberals” often were left as the political alternative on the right. Thus, liberalism in Latin America to this day has connotations of right-wing politics, and the marketization of Latin American economies in the last generation is often termed “neoliberalism.”

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously. But in the context of this discussion we are clearly talking about modern Keynsian, progressivist liberals. That is why I put quotes over the term, "liberal." The modern use is contradictory to its original meaning.

Also, a one dimensional political spectrum won't cover 18th century liberals. It needs to be two dimensional.

EDIT: Whoops, didn't even bother to read the OP. Your answer is pretty good aside from the application of the crude modern politcal spectrum.

Re: What is liberalism?
 

Ok, I'll answer my own question. American liberalism is actually social demoratic politics with another name.

Re: What is liberalism?
 

The OP asked what liberalism is and where it came from. Liberalism came from the Enlightenment philosophers. If you want to talk about what people call "Liberalism" now (which it seems is what everybody is doing), then that is not answering the OP's question.

I think in order to know what liberals, as the word is used now, actually are, then you should know the history of liberalism and how it evolved.

Re: What is liberalism?
 

I was sort of trying to make a point about how people don't really understand the difference between American liberalism and liberalism as a political ideology. In particular, I wanted to point out that conservatives in the United States are constantly attacking liberals without really understanding what they are talking about.

Re: What is liberalism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, I'll answer my own question. American liberalism is actually social demoratic politics with another name.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Waxie,

I think contemporary American "liberals" are much more centrist on economic issues that European social democrats. There is definitely a distinction there, especially between American liberals and the social democrats in places where social democracy has traditionally been very strong, such as in Scandinavia.

Sam

Re: What is liberalism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
In particular, I wanted to point out that conservatives in the United States are constantly attacking liberals without really understanding what they are talking about.

[/ QUOTE ]

The right's use of the word 'liberal' is more or less synonymous with "person/people/thing/idea I don't like" -- or even more bluntly, 'liberal' = 'not right-wing'.

My guess is, if you asked the average right-winger to define 'liberal', they'd just say things like: "hippie", "pussy", "tree-hugger", "PC police officer", "bleeding heart", "likes welfare", "hates old white men & the American heartland", "anti-Christian", "permissive morals", "baby killer" -- or whatever such ways the right throws out liberal to describe things they don't like.

So I think the right constantly attacks 'liberals' because they've so (successfully!) framed the word that, to your average right-winger (and in many ways to your average voter), it now instantly cues up images/words like "pussy", "bleeding heart", etc -- much to the benefit of the right/its candidates, who no longer need to detail specific policy differences/grievances with their Democratic/moderate Republican opponents; just slap their opponent's face in an ad and say 'liberal' as many times as possible in 60 seconds and -- viola!, you've created a successful campaign ad for a right-wing candidate.

So I don't think it's quite correct to say that the right 'doesn't understand what liberal means'. As I said, I think the right has so successfully framed the word ‘liberal’ that its common usage is now (at least for many in the US) more or less the same as the pejorative synonyms the right so skillfully managed to link it to over the last 30 years.

In other words, the right so adroitly perverted the meaning of the word that its 'classical' definition is now clearly differentiated from its 'contemporary' one.

Re: What is liberalism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Your answer is pretty good aside from the application of the crude modern politcal spectrum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks, I guess.

The uni-dimensional spectrum is obviously not an accurate representation but is a useful heuristic model when talking about these differences historically, since the role of the state in the capitalist economy has been the divisive issue from the late 19th century onward and can be represented in a compelling way on one dimension. It is also obviously the ordinary language model that is generally invoked in politics.

Re: What is liberalism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think in order to know what liberals, as the word is used now, actually are, then you should know the history of liberalism and how it evolved.

[/ QUOTE ]

Contemporary liberalism is less related to "classical" liberalism than is contemporary conservatism.

Re: What is liberalism?
 

I'm not advocating a specific approach, nor saying this applies in all cases, just trying to give a general overview that you requested.

I would say your response is perhaps simplistic. When I refer to a idealogical base, I mean that there are rules and principles that govern how you approach a problem. For instance, mathematical rules govern math. One of those rules might be addition, and by using it you are able to figure out 2 + 2 = 4. Since you understand addition you can apply it to new situations, like 2 + 1 = 3. Things like "all men are created equal" are like the addition of political idealogy.

If you don't have a base set of principles, you can make addition do whatever you want. You can make 2 + 2 = 5, and 2 + 1 = 5. However, you quickly find that they can't both be five, and this is where the problem by problem approach often breaks down. It's the political equivilant of implementing farm subsidies to save farm jobs then complaining about tech outsourcing because everyone in India had to close down thier farm and move to the city and learn about computers.

Sometimes your basic principles are wrong or are you misapplying them. For instance, in high level mathematics you realize that there are wacko cases where 2 + 2 doesn't = 4. However, as long as those principles remain adaptive they can still be used in the majority of cases. An overall working framework helps you keep uniform policy accross problems so you don't trip over yourself. Or as my old math professor would say, "simplicity is elegence".

Benefits of adaptive policy principles:
1) Uniform
2) Transparant
3) Simple
4) Usually more vetted because they have been around longer

If we want to get into your question, or how I handle political problems myself, this requires a great deal more writing.

Re: What is liberalism?
 

I agree, but I think most American "liberals" don't really understand liberalism and that's a big part of the problem.

Re: What is liberalism?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think in order to know what liberals, as the word is used now, actually are, then you should know the history of liberalism and how it evolved.

[/ QUOTE ]

Contemporary liberalism is less related to "classical" liberalism than is contemporary conservatism.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is right; I think I said that in my reply. In the economic sense, the Republicans are more classically liberal, and the Democrats are modern liberals. It is switched when it comes to the social spectrum. What I said was that contemporary liberalism, in the United States, is an evolution of the classical liberalism model that came from Locke and Smith .

In fact, it may have been good to show this example in the Conservatism post that was put up a week ago, so my point would have been clearer. I said that Conservatives are set in the past (regressive), and Liberals believe in change (progressive), and this may be a good example of that. The Republicans are into OLD style liberalism, hence, they can be considered less progressive than Democrats on certain issues since Democrats are more into Modern Liberalism.

Re: What is liberalism?
 

[ QUOTE ]

I agree, but I think most American "liberals" don't really understand liberalism and that's a big part of the problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

That might be true.

But is at least equally true that most people in America don't understand that the "liberalism" of the Democratic party is a very centrist ideology and that American politics is really about a conflict between the right and the center. An electorally strong "left" has never really existed in America.

That is the cat that the Republican party really doesn't want out of the bag. Who wants to be seen as engaging in an ideological battle against "the center?" Luckily for the GOP, the American populace has trouble enough finding Europe on a map, much less understanding the historical distinctions between socialism, social democracy, modern liberalism, and new and old conservatism.