Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

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.

Start Making Sense: Is Liberalism Dead?

By Lakshmi Chaudhry and George Lakoff and Van Jones and Adam Werbach and Wes Boyd, AlterNet. Posted June 16, 2005.


Is liberalism dead? What will it take for us to bring about a rebirth of inspiration, hope and optimism for a new American future?
SMS

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Editor's Note: The following is Part III in a series of transcripts taken from a standing-room-only book panel/party in San Francisco for AlterNet's new book, Start Making Sense: Turning the Lessons of Election 2004 into Winning Progressive Politics.

The panel included Van Jones (executive director of Ella Baker Center for Human Rights), George Lakoff (linguist and best-selling author), Wes Boyd (co-founder of MoveOn.org), Adam Werbach (executive director of Common Assets Defense Fund), Lakshmi Chaudhry (senior editor of AlterNet) and moderator Holly Minch (director of the Spin Project).

Part III

Holly Minch:

Is liberalism as we know it dead? Rest in peace. Or are we in the process of a rebirth? And what will it take for us to bring about a rebirth of inspiration and hope and optimism for a new American future?

Van Jones:

Well I don’t know about whether anything is dead or not. This is what I think. I think that we need a new story. I think that we need a new myth and I want to suggest one.

I want to make an argument that we are entering the third wave of environmentalism. And that the third wave of environmentalism actually creates the possibility of a new politics in the United States.

The first wave was called conservation; Teddy Roosevelt; let’s preserve the wild areas, etc. And that had its day and it had its beauty. The second wave initiated by Rachel Carson’s book “Silent Spring” and could be considered a regulation wave. Let’s regulate the bad stuff. Let’s regulate toxics, poisons, pollution. Let’s try to keep that bad stuff away from our children, away from our drinking water, etcetera.

The third wave, which is coming is conservation, yes, plus regulation of the bad, yes, plus investment in the good: investment in solar; investment in permaculture; investment in organic; investment in high performance cars and high performance buildings; investment in the environmental technology of the future. And that new wave, that new green wave has a potential to create new jobs, to create new wealth and to deliver environmental benefit. Not just avoid environmental horror but to deliver environmental benefits to this country.

Now, there is a danger. The danger is – the question that has to be asked and answered is – will this new green wave lift all boats? Will this new green wave lift all boats or will we have eco apartheid? Will we have what we have right now where in Marin you’ve got solar this and bio that and everything is groovy and hybrids and everything and it’s all eco and fifteen minutes away in Oakland you have smoke stakes, asthma epidemic, cancer clusters, learning disabilities, birth defects and the whole nine yards, all driven by environmental pollution. Are we going to have eco apartheid or are we going to have eco equity? That question, if we stand together and say, “You know what? This new green wave will lift all boats. We are going to stand together on a single, moral principle.

And that principle is this. Those communities that were locked out of the last centuries’ pollution based economy are going to be locked in to the new clean and green economy. We make that declaration. [Applause] When you do that something quite remarkable opens up as a possibility.

First of all, the economic justice struggles and the criminal justice struggles and the racial justice struggles suddenly have something in common. Something in common with the more white, affluent, progressive struggles. You can begin to put together a united front. You can begin to say, “We have a role now for government as progressives. As progressives we say, “no, no, no, we don’t want a nanny state but we don’t want a Robo Cop state either. We refuse to go back and forth between this welfare state versus warfare state debate, which is a false and leaves our communities further and further behind. We have a role for government. [Applause]

And the role for government is this: partner. We want the government to be a partner to our communities as we struggle to get into this new green economy. We want the government to stand with the problem solvers, the eco entrepreneurs, the guys and the women in the neighborhood who are trying to make peace and keep things together. We want government to fund the problem solvers and stop funding the problem makers. Stop funding the incarcerators and the polluters and the war mongers. We want government as a partner to the problem solvers. On that basis you have the beginnings of something quite remarkable; a new deal coalition for the new century. That’s my hope. [Applause]


Digg!

For a complete audio recording of this panel, visit the SMS blog entry with MP3 files for downloading.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
So, When Did Lakoff Become A Republican?
Posted by: thirdmg on Jun 15, 2005 10:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
George Lakoff: "What's important about this is to understand that business of America is business...."

Republican President Calvin Coolidge (1923-1929): "The business of America is business."

So, when did George Lakoff join Calvin Coolidge to become a conservative Republican?

It seems to me that the true business of America is to serve the interests of the American people. Although business interests are legitimate, they are only one of those interests, and it's one from which we often need careful protection. After all, businesses do not exist to serve any interests other than the profit motive of the owners. That businesses might provide a useful product or service is secondary and incidental to their central reason for existence, and merely necessary to the maintenance of a profitable bottom line.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lakoff
Posted by: karyse on Jun 16, 2005 5:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The reader asked "when did Lakoff become a Republican?" Sadly he has always been one. And even worse, it has been years since Liberals were actually liberal.

liberal -- the rights and freedoms of the individual supercede the needs, or wants of a state.

The U.S. was a liberal nation at one time, but we have been totalitarian for a long time now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Environmentalism in the cities
Posted by: gpm on Jun 16, 2005 6:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'd like to hear someone expand on Van Jones' comment about how to extend environmental advances to the poor. I fear that it might take more than "standing together" to get this done.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Decency, Fairness, Equality, Justice
Posted by: Sandra on Jun 16, 2005 8:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The following words fom the article above express my beliefs -
"In the end what it is, is some basic belief in common decency, fairness, equality, justice, the idea that a society in which the weakest and the frailest are simply sort of left behind is not a society worth living in, that where people should have opportunity to be the best that they can be". The administration and the Congress of this country seem to be working hard to destroy this country and its people. I'm willing to continue to work toward the beliefs outlined above and I hope that others will join in that effort. We may not all agree on how we can achieve decency, fairness, equality, etc. but the very act of working toward something constructive will make changes in the system. We need to continue to evolve to something better than we have in this country right now and to continue to evolve into better people as we manage our lives and our government. I'm not sure what to call this movement, others may have a name for it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No, American LIberalism is NOT, repeat NOT, Dead.
Posted by: Dr. Jim on Jun 16, 2005 8:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Liberalism is predicated on five basic, structural principles: Individual Liberty, Humanity, Progress, Ethics, and The Rule of Law. The principles are interactive and from among all the combinations a Liberal can understand the ideological basis for action.

Progressives are Liberals.

Liberals are humane people. The Liberal program at any given time is built upon the notion that we must help the weakest among us. We reject CATEGORICALLY the Gospel of Wealth and Social Darwinist positions held by the radical right.

Liberals are Progressive. We believe in improvement and enriching the human spirit through social action ... and individual activity.

Take a look at The American Liberalism Project website.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

paris2
Posted by: paris2 on Jun 16, 2005 8:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A bumpersticker I saw yesterday sums up, in part, what the necessary dialog needs to be in this country right now,if progressives want to reach the other 50%;
JESUS WAS A LIBERAL.
Everyone references morality, but what I see is a massive war being fought in the US (and abroad) to define this country as "Christian". And the war seems to be being won by this administration. We are in a very dangerous moment......

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dead, but for how long?
Posted by: sl7xt on Jun 16, 2005 9:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Liberalism is dead, at least in any current political sense. The Democrats have become nothing more than Conservatives with the rough edges filed off. They still serve corporate interests first. This was applied to FDR as much as it does to Clinton (today's so-called liberal poster child). Hillary will prove no better for the left.

In truth, there is no one other to blame than the people of this country. We continually allow our freedoms and our own political power to be userped by our political leaders. The Kerry campain is a great example of this. Everyone on the left jumped on board and supported him despite his pro war and pro corporate stances. Even Howard Dean fall into this camp. Though he tends to be a bit more balanced, he is still a pro war, pro corporation politician.

We have a long tradition in this country of populist movements. It seems that in pretty much all of them they were continually thwarted by the right. By right, I lump together anyone who stands against anyone who is afraid of the "ignorant" masses when they arise.

Our politicians are perfectly content lining the pockets of their benefactors, while the rest of america falls apart. Let us be perfectly honest. There role is not to ensure our freedom, it is to maintain the status quo. We are a highly stratified economic class system and it is their job to make sure that those in the middle and bottom don't ruffle the feathers of those on the top too much. A great example of this is what occured during the Spanish Revolution. The Anarchists and Socialists, both mass popular movements seized power and ran things in a very equitable and just manner. All the powers involved, the USA, Britian, France, and yes even the USSR, did everything they could to topple this movement. They were afraid. All the while, the western powers, including the USA, supported Franco's fascist movement.

Perhaps someday we will take an honest look at history. Our country has be seized by the political right. It is still ours to take back if we really wanted to.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ecology is a benchmark
Posted by: Sojourner on Jun 16, 2005 10:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Any individual who does not preserve health is a fool. Any political system that cannot preserve its natural resources shows itself to be a lie.

Bush's 'conservatism' widely shows itself to be a lie, and the global warming issue condemns it. Insofar as we all live in circumstances that are unhealthy, however, we gamble with life.

Bush is playing to that gambling, and so far he has succeeded. Rather than solve the domestic problem of the shrinking middle class, we have chosen militarism and imperialism.

Our current preference for the luck of the draw will last as long as it works, and that's not forever. What will remain after it pays out is anyone's guess.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

RE: JINGOIST
Posted by: Tubeguru on Jun 16, 2005 10:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It seems to me that leftists are tellling people what they stand for. That the government should be concerned with the environment and making sure that people have access to healthcare, and that they are entitled to justice. Corporate business is obviously not concerned with these things, and in practice seems to be actively concerned with denying these things to the general population.
It is my personal opinion that government should have more control over corporate business, which has an unfair adventage in a free market economy.
TG

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

First order of Liberal business
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Jun 16, 2005 11:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First - Reform Campaign Financing

Though we the people have the clout;
To vote the politicians out;
We'd still be ruled by sleazy "smarties";
Who give money to both parties;
And here's the truth without a doubt;
We can't vote those rascals out.

http://www.lincolninitiative.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

maimonides
Posted by: maimonides on Jun 16, 2005 1:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is important to remember what conservatives are good for. They are good for correcting progressive mistakes. American politics runs in long-term cycles. Progressives undertake major initiatives (Jacksonianism, Radical Republicanism, New Deal, Great Society). Some work, some don't, but progressives generally aren't very good at admitting the latter. Then conservatives come along and prune the weakest limbs of the progressive tree. Sometimes they overprune; they're no better at admitting the limitations of their ideology than progressives. But ultimately, the American tree is a progressive tree. Note the kinds of leaders who have national holidays named after them: Washington, who substituted democracy for monarchy; Lincoln, who abolished slavery; King, who led the fight for civil rights. Not a conservative among them. We are now in a progressive pre-spring. The buds are fattening. The leaves and flowers have not yet emerged. But they will. Take heart. They will.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: maimonides Posted by: susan9390
The only problem with liberals is...
Posted by: Linette on Jun 16, 2005 2:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They don't understand what James Kroeger understands about human nature, marketing, and the nuances of Image Campaigns. In his article The Republican Nemesis, Kroeger explains the emotional element that Republican campaign strategists have been able to repeatedly exploit vis-a-vis the Democrats.

It is a must-read for anyone who is considering a run for the Presidency in 2008.

Linette

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Seemed pretty evident to me Posted by: Sojourner
Crazy-talk
Posted by: thweems on Jun 16, 2005 3:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Liberalism is not "dead". It may be overshadowed by national fear at this point, but it is far from DEAD. I wish people would get off the drama and stop making such hysterical, doomsday statements.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

bar5608
Posted by: bar5608 on Jun 19, 2005 12:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Liberalism is certainly not dead. Because I am not, and neither are you folks who write on the Alternet.
But unfortunately neither are the NeoCons, although few of them would be mourned if suddenly lost.
All Liberalism, or Progressivism, or whatever, needs to survive, or be revived, is a few new twists to the wording, and some swift and accurate replys to the tricks and wrong turns of the other side.
If John Kerry had been quicker to point out that those 'so-called' Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, would be more accurately described as the "Swift Boat Liars for Money" he could have come several strides further toward a win in the last election. It seems to be no accident that the Conservative side seems to cling to the stories and viewpoints of the liars and con artists of the underground, because they are no strangers to the tactic of lying to the Public in order to achieve their goals.
For instance, just a few days ago the Bush Administration weakened the efforts toward environmental sensibility in order to secure more profits to Polluters. We should ask them just where they intend to live when they have screwed up this Earth so bad that the fish and worms can no longer reproduce like they have for millenia. If they intend to get off this Earth and live somewhere else. lets invite them to leave now. We'll miss them.
The entire Conservative viewpoint has to be shown for what it is, a bald faced lie to preserve the privileges of the over priveleged, and to secure their place in History by building a bigger tombstone. In other words, they're insane. Fouling their own nest, is what I call that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]