We Are Still, Mostly, Liberals

 

Blog:  We Are Still, Mostly, Liberals

MGK

March 11, 2021

 

I am enrolled in a graduate program in Philosophy, and the latest course is in Economic Philosophy.  It is fantastic to learn more about economic approaches and systems and think about how they interact with culture and politics.  I have learned much that has made me slow down and think, and I wanted to share a little bit of that.  I’m not an expert here; I’m a learner, but I thought you might want to learn along with me.

 

If I said to you that much of the country, moving from left to right from anywhere near the center of the political continuum, and including traditional Democrats and traditional Republicans, are liberals, you might challenge that.  The problem is in the way the word “liberal” is used, whether pejoratively (by some on the right) or inaccurately.  We think of liberals as progressive, tolerant, open-minded, and not concerned about conserving cultural and religious traditions.  However, in a political-economic context, the term “liberalism” has a long history going back a few hundred years to the period known as the Age of Enlightenment, to the work of western Enlightenment thinkers such as Immanuel Kant, John Locke and Adam Smith, among others.

These Enlightenment ideas are central to American political and economic life, and have been since our beginning.   Liberalism, or “classical liberalism,” is an idea centered on the primacy of the individual and the individual’s rights, rights which are “self-evident” and “unalienable.”   I’m sure you are familiar with those words, and the related ones, also from our founding documents, such as our individual rights to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”  Our country was founded on the platform of classical liberalism, based on individual rights and freedoms.  However, it is worth noting that we are still, some two hundred and fifty years later, trying to fully realize this vision of individual rights and liberties.  When our country was founded, women, people of color, and many other groups, were not afforded those same rights, despite the vision having been clear.  We continue to work to close the gap between that vision and our lived reality.

 Traditional conservatives and Republicans are classical liberals.  Those fighting for lower taxes and less regulation are classical liberals.  Those fighting hard for the rights of women, people of color, trans people, are classical liberals, too.  Most of us living in the US are classical liberals.  Indeed, what holds us together is our shared belief in the rights and liberties of individuals.  Basically, since this country’s beginning, classical liberalism, translated as the belief that the rights of the individual are more important than the rights of the collective, has won.  This doesn't mean we are entirely individually-oriented.  We do, like some Enlightenment thinkers, consider the common good and shared interests, but individuality does stand on a higher shelf.

 Americans have always opposed central control, also known as socialism.  Socialism, based on a collectivist approach, has always lost badly.  “What?” you say?  “I thought we were on the verge of becoming a socialist country, like the ones in Western Europe.  I hear it on the news and read articles about it on social media!”  Well, not really.  Socialism is a system wherein government controls the means of production, meaning all companies, factories, etc.  A socialist system is not a democracy; it is a collectivist approach wherein the central government owns everything.  We are nowhere near that, and will likely never be, at least in our lifetimes.  Bernie Sanders is not a Socialist, he is a Democratic Socialist.  Democratic Socialism, as it is called in Western Europe, is a democratic system with a more substantial social welfare component which provides forms of government assistance for the welfare of citizens, for example retirement income supplements, healthcare, food and housing assistance, as well as more regulation of the employer-employee relationship.  Their business economic systems, however, are largely privately owned, just like ours in the US.  Think of Democratic Socialism as the left end of the classic liberal continuum, with Libertarianism as the right end.  It is far from Socialism, as it accepts capitalism and democracy, though it does attempt to take the rough, perhaps cruel edge off free market capitalism.

 What is so concerning about our recent politics is that we have come close to embracing a political movement that it is illiberal.  In other words, we have witnessed an attempt to bestow a large amount of power into an individual leader, giving that individual “above the law” status and allowing that leader to circumvent democratic processes, such as how public funds get appropriated and how elections get decided and certified.  This movement is really a movement against liberalism, dressed up as populist nationalism.  It has a militaristic fascist component.  It represents a break from our traditional liberalism, and we should all be very concerned should another Trump-style leader and movement gain decisive power in our three branches of government again.

 The Trump movement is much closer to the centralized power that we fear from Socialism, and it is much farther from our modern Democrat, Republican and Democratic Socialist parties.  Sometimes it seems that the political “wars” between traditional Ds and Rs are exhausting and unending.  Indeed, they can be, but that isn’t always a bad thing.  It means conversations and debates are taking place between liberals, i.e., classical liberals.  The existential threat to our system is not the fight about tax rates, or minimum wages, or immigration, or healthcare.  Those can all be dealt with inside of the large tent of classical liberalism.  The threat is whether we are willing to turn over our liberties, our institutions, and our laws to an individual and a movement that want to be above them.  The true threat, and the real choice, is between liberalism and fascism.  I could ask the question: “Which side are you on?”, but I think it is better to ask: “How have you been thinking about this?” 

 What I have attempted to present here is an historical and intellectual description of economic systems, but the cultural aspect is equally important.  From a cultural perspective, we are very polarized, and often, it seems that our political identities are not always aligned with our views on issues and policies.  We largely agree on many important issues - more often than we think.  We focus on our differences, making them bigger than they really are.  In the US, we live in a big tent of classical liberalism.  It is at the core of our founding; it is the core of who we are.   We argue in this tent, but there is plenty of room for debate.  We must not forget who we are.  Let’s not miss the forest for the trees.  Even at our most polarized moments, we have always been on the same side in terms of the kind of country we are, or at least the kind of country we strive to be.  Let’s remember that.