Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.
Self-Declared Liberals Have Nothing to Be Afraid of
Also in Top Stories
Bush-Led 'Disaster Capitalism' Exploits Worldwide Misery to Make a Buck
Naomi Klein, The Nation
Echoes of Vietnam: VA Stalls, Dissembles While Vets Suffer and Die
Penny Coleman, AlterNet
The Science of Happiness: Is It All Bullshit?
Bruce E. Levine, AlterNet
The U.S. Is Drowning in Pretend Patriotism
Robert Scheer, Truthdig
Pregnancy Pact Myth Refuses to Die
Amanda Marcotte, Pandagon
The World Health Organization Documents Failure of U.S. Drug Policies
Bruce Mirken, AlterNet
Surviving a Weekend with America's Premiere Pro-White Activist Group
Gabriel Thompson, AlterNet
I often think it's comical -- Fal, lal, la!
How Nature always does contrive -- Fal, lal, la!
That every boy and every gal
That's born into the world alive
Is either a little Liberal
Or else a little Conservative!
Fal, lal, la! —Iolanthe, Gilbert and Sullivan, 1882
Hillary Clinton: "... So I consider myself a proud modern American progressive, and I think that's the kind of philosophy and practice that we need to bring back to American politics." Anderson Cooper: "So you wouldn't use the word liberal, you'd say progressive?" Hillary Clinton: [nods] --CNN-YouTube presidential primary debate, July 23, 2007
It is time for a fresh look at how we label political viewpoints in America.
These days, the terms left and right, liberal and conservative, are most often applied to ideas, groups, and individuals by those aiming to discredit them. Not a very reliable way of understanding what the words mean.
If you are inclined to be a liberal, you can't avoid hearing the radio voices of the Limbaughs, Coulters, Hannitys, and Savages growling and hissing in the back of your head.
Liberalism has been so demonized that many people have either stopped defining themselves politically, straddled the question ("I'm a fiscal conservative but liberal on social issues"), claimed to be independent or pragmatic, looked for a "third way," moved to the center, or adopted the term "progressive."
The word "progressive" seems honorable enough, harkening back to the Progressive Era, 25 years of popular upheaval before World War I when anti-trust laws were passed, child labor was abolished, Teddy Roosevelt dedicated national parks, and government reforms were directed against the wealthy and the corrupt.
So, should we bury the word "liberal" and try to define ourselves along a continuum that we call progressive on the left side and conservative on the right?
No, for several good reasons.
First, such a shift would not be broadly accepted. As the lyrics from Gilbert and Sullivan's Iolanthe remind us, the liberal-conservative dichotomy has been rooted in Western culture for more than a century, on both sides of the Atlantic. Reporting on political candidates, groups, and events, the media will continue to apply those labels regardless of what the people involved may say. The press calls MoveOn.org "liberal," a word the group has never used to describe itself.
Second, liberalism has a proud history and deserves respect equal to that accorded to conservatism. The word has many positive associations: our cherished liberties as a free people, liberal arts and education, liberal democracy, the liberation of the enslaved and oppressed, and national liberators from Simon Bolivar to Daniel O'Connell to Lech Walesa.
Ducking for cover under a new name will only invite more ridicule. From the Goldwater defeat of 1964 to the Reagan victory of 1980, a sturdy band of Republicans worked to convert the conservative label into a badge of pride, and they succeeded.
Third, there is a growing intellectual movement to rehabilitate the liberal tradition in America, tracing its course from the founding fathers to the 20th century leaders who pulled the country out of depression, prevailed over fascism, fought racial discrimination, instituted a mixed economy, and crafted the détente that kept us out of nuclear war. Paul Starr's recent book Freedom's Power: The True Force of Liberalism, is one example. Another was the proclamation by Bruce Ackerman and Todd Gitlin, just before the November 2006 elections, published on the website of the American Prospect, "We Answer to the Name of Liberals," signed by thousands of professors and ordinary citizens.
Fourth and most importantly, simply replacing "liberal" with "progressive" robs us of the opportunity that progressivism could stand for something quite different. It could be a perspective on politics that is not a slot on the horizontal left-right spectrum of ideological views, but represents motion in a vertical direction, to advance the way we resolve problems in American public life to a higher plane.
This could be very promising. A progressive may be a reformer who looks into the future, who seeks to resolve the left-right debate on major public policy issues and move society to a better level of political function. Perhaps progressive political philosophy is not a brand of ideological orientation, but a transitional way of thinking and acting that occurs only when reform is badly needed, long overdue, and well-conceived by farsighted men and women.
See more stories tagged with: conservative, liberal, progressive
Greg Colvin and his family divide their time between home in Petaluma, Calif., and a log cabin in Bath, N.Y. Besides progressive political philosophy, Greg's other big project is a 12-year campaign to hike the 2,700-mile Pacific Crest Trail from Mexico to Canada with his two adult sons: 490 miles so far.
Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »