Not gonna do it.
Wouldn't be prudent.
At this juncture.
But I've got a really good excuse, and an even better idea.
Here's the thing. Howie asked me to define liberalism and conservatism. I thought that would be a good idea for a post, and told him I would do it. However, the more I wrote, the uneasier I felt, and I couldn't figure out why.
I stopped writing, and started thinking, something I usually avoid at all costs because it tends to make my writing dull and lifeless. Why did I feelbad writing about my definition of liberalism?
Eventually it hit me; I'm not the right person to define liberalism, at least its modern incarnation, because I see it as a fundamentally flawed ideology. At it's heart, liberalism is based on the idea that we are owed a certain standard of living based solely on the fact that we have a pulse. Science tells us that this simply is not so, that life has no money back guarantees of safety, security, or prosperity.
I see modern liberalism as an attempt to deny that basic truth.
So how could I do justice to a definition of it?
I'm also gong to beg off of defining conservatism, for similar reasons. Modern conservatism, at least as defined by the Republican Party, has strayed from its roots just as far as modern liberalism has. Just as an example, can anybody claim that the Republican party represents small government anymore?
So here is what I intend to do.
First, I'm opening up the comments section to all of you to post your definitions of liberal and conservative. Tell me and howie how you would define the terms. In your oomments, please identify how you describe yourself.
Second, I'm going to invite two bloggers, one conservative and one liberal, to define their ideologies, and I'll post their definitions here in a future post. I'm going to let a true conservative and a true liberal to speak for themselves, rather than attempt to speak for them.
Finally, I'm going to define my own political ideology, which tends towards libertarianism, without some of the lunacy spouted by the "big L" libertarians.
Through this approach, I think howie will get a much better set of working definitions, and we all might learn a little something about the folks on the other side.
Posted by Rich at August 24, 2006 6:48 PM | TrackBack"liberalism" is a group of thought that came out of the Western Enlightenment - that is, that liberty is the key political value. Its interventionist wing peaked in the 1970's with welfare recipients being described as "clients". Likewise, the interventionist wing of the 'conservatives' is peaking now with the Iraq experiment, warrantless wiretaps, and unprecedented deficit spending.
I consider myself a "Libertarian/Liberal", which demonstrates how absurd the entire classification system is. So good luck!
Rich, I think your perception of the definition of liberal is wrong, however justifiably so in that it's the definition that has evolved over time to take the place of the earlier, more pure philosophical definition.
That is, that liberalism is the philosophy that embraces the fact that we all live on the earth together, and are each responsiblie in some way for the uplifting and nurturement of each other. While we must each take our own personal responsibilities seriously and not depend on the strength of the group, the group should not turn its back on the individuals and lend support and encouragement whenever possible. Hence "It Takes a Village" to raise a child.
This is in somewhat direct opposition to the conservative philosophy of the power and duty of "the one", where oneself is only needed to pull up by our own bootstraps, where we are responsible only for ourselves and our well being. Depending on others is seen as weakness and inner fortitude is virtue and strength.
There are obviously crossovers and blending of the two philosophies, and I don't do them completely justice here (philanthropy comes in all stripes, but the motivations may differ) but that's what I believe.
Posted by: Barry on August 25, 2006 1:49 PMSorry, forgot to mention one thing. Your definition is what liberalism has become in a lot of ways - dependence on the kindness of strangers as a way of life, feeling that we are "owed" that standard of living is a perversion of the basic responsibility to support yourself to the best of your ability, but not be opposed to assistance from the village as it were. The responsibility begins with oneself.
Posted by: Barry on August 25, 2006 1:51 PMthanks for opening up this conversation, rich.
i found this site a while back (i mentioned it during the '04 election reparte) that evaluates where folks stand on the political spectrum. i find it interesting, but maybe that's because it promotes my idea that many democrats who are frequently described as liberal are, in fact, lean conservative.
http://www.politicalcompass.org/
i am trying to figure out what the basic precepts for political leaning are, and how allegience to these ideas have changed over time. if anyone's found any other sites with a good overview, i'd be interested in checking them out.
according to the above site, i am a lefty libertarian.
Posted by: howie on August 25, 2006 6:28 PMI began writing and got a little carried away. I decided to post my own definition of liberalsim since it was getting pretty long.
http://tnprogressivereport.blogspot.com/2006/08/liberal-vs-conservative.html
Posted by: Matt on August 27, 2006 12:36 PM