The word "Liberal" means almost the opposite of what it meant 100 years ago - what should we use instead?

Question

Socialist? Leftist? Collectivist?

I like Leftist Collectivist - I think that sums it up. They vary in degree only but they share a tendency to advocate the same means - subjugation of the individual to the state.

And we should refer to fascists as "Rightist Collectivists" - the use of both terms would make it very clear that we were recognizing that socialists and fascists are merely two rival tribes of collectivists.

"Conserved things" - - yeah, we do conserve things - private property and invidual rights.

"progressive" is inaccurate. You want to take society in a certain direction, that fits your society-wide ideals - whether the individuals who comprise society agree with you or not - and if they did, you wouldn't need the force of government to effect that result. So whether or not moving in that direction is "progress" is only a subjective view held by you, thus it cannot be used to define your ideology.

We are concerned here with means, not ends. The political differences among us relate to means, not ends.

The ends are they way you'd like to see the world - - political ideology is a matter of how you're willing to get there - - through coercion or not.

If you're accepting of coercion, then you're a collectivist - - - whether you're a socialist, a fascist or something in between is a matter of the ends to which you wish to coerce individuals.

If you oppose coercion, you are what 100 years ago would be called a "liberal" but today is called a "libertarian."

don c, you're the one who changed the definition - - - "liberal" used to mean what "libertarian" means today - - - you people co-opted a word that everyone agreed with and changed its meaning so that you could use that word to mean the opposite - - - creating a notion of "rights" to have someone provide you with something and yet calling that "equal."

Answer 1

I think your choices are pretty apt.

Answer 2

Are you arguing that anyone who believes that government has a role in public life believes in "subjugation of the individual to the state"? If so, I believe that makes you an anarchist. While I will grant the meaning of the word "liberal" has changed, I think that for you to call anyone today who is a liberal a "leftist collectivist" shows a misunderstanding of liberalism. In other words, you're merely smearing a group you don't like with the biggest insult an American can make about someone--they're all "commies." You've drunk the right wing nut Kool Aid.

Answer 3

I don't know buddy but, I just printed a bunch of info concering neo-liberalism. An article from the fever swamp site AlterNet keyed me into this. Check it out. I will be reading about... exactly 7 articles about it this weekend. Links on the way!

Links:
Neoliberalism Dismantles Services to Make Elites Even Richer - http://www.alternet.org/workplace/61002/

Neoliberalism: origins, theory, definition - http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/neoliberalism.html

What is "Neo-Liberalism"? A Brief Definition - http://www.globalexchange.org/campaigns/econ101/neoliberalDefined.html

Answer 4

All definitions have been lost along the way. Liberal used to mean open to change, while Conservative meant holding on to traditional ways of doing things. Today, both parties are 'liberal' in that they both advocate change, they just disagree on what the changes should be.

Answer 5

Socialist and fascism are the extremes. And yes, they both employ redistribution of wealth.

Where does libertarianism come in to play? Too bad politicians would never give up their power for the benefit of the citizenry

Answer 6

Wrong. Liberals are still liberal. Freedom for all. Women should be able to decide if they have babies, people of the same sex should be able to marry and adopt children. All Americans are entitled to certain rights. Not just people in certain states. I could care less about states controlling the taxes,budgets, roads, certain laws etc but when it comes to people's rights the central government should entitle those things to everyone in every state.

Answer 7

Don't need a name for them. I just know them when I see them and it rarely turns out well. Nearly everything wrong with this country today is the result of their actions.

- Creation of a welfare state.
- Creation of a dependent class.
- Erosion of personal responsibility, self worth and self respect.
- Propagation of racism through promotion of victimization.
- Erosion of the educational system given their 'one size fits all' approach.
- Acceptance of infanticide as an excepted, inevitable and 'humane' norm.
- Erosion of military strength and national security.
- Erosion of the right of communities to freedom of religion.
- Erosion of the right to bear arms which has resulted in higher crime and murder rates in many communities. Washington D.C. is a prime example of this fact.

I'd continue, but I think I've made my point. American culture is weaker today as a direct result of well intentioned though failed social engineering.

Answer 8

I agree.

I think you might also want to put in a few comments for the people who don't realize what liberal meant 100 years ago.

Answer 9

I just call them libs. A guy I know uses the phrase Libjihadis, and lieberals is popular with the cons. I think the libs wouldn't mind being called progressives. Didn't Hillary call herself progressive?

Answer 10

Use the term the rest of the world uses... Democratic Socialist... it's what they are...

Libertarians can take back the term Liberal...

Conservatives can take the term they're known by across the world, Christian Democrats...

Answer 11

Libs, progressives, all the same. Take from you and give to someone else. Sum it up for ya?