The central premise of David Brooks’ column in the New York Times today is that “there are now two conservatives in this country for every liberal.” Brooks, in his inimitable way, goes on to try to explain the conservatives’ ideological advantage. His central premise, based on responses to polls, is fallacious, but it is widely believed, even by some liberals, who take it as evidence that progressives labor at a constant disadvantage in what is effectively a “center-right” country.
That somewhere around twice as many Americans tell pollsters that they are “conservative” than call themselves “liberal” is nothing new. It has been true for decades. Nevertheless, somehow during the same period, Democrats have usually enjoyed majorities in Congress and Democrats Carter, Clinton, Gore (arguably) and Obama have won presidential elections. How to explain the apparent contradiction, given that the Democrats are undoubtedly the more liberal of the two parties?
What Brooks doesn’t tell us is that while polls have showed self-identified conservatives vastly outnumbering self-identified liberals, the polls have also showed that if you ask people’s views on issues--like social security, taxation, minimum wage and health care policy, etc., and even social issues like abortion rights--there’s generally been a rough parity between those who hold conservative and those who hold liberal views. ( I say “a rough parity” because obviously there have been fluctuations over time and depending on how the poll questions are asked; at times, liberal views have been clearly ascendant.) Again, an apparent paradox, but one that is easily explained. Americans by and large aren’t particularly sophisticated in matters of political ideology. A very large proportion of Americans have only the fuzziest idea of what the terms “liberal” and “conservative” really mean. So, a good many self-identified “conservatives” and “moderates” are operational liberals.
The right has won a major semantic victory in recent decades--they have made “liberal” into a dirty word. Anyone consciously self-identifying as a liberal is probably pretty sophisticated; he/she has to really understand what it means and be unintimidated by the negative connotations the right has managed to attach to the term. It’s almost surprising that even 20% of Americans actually call themselves “liberal.” “Conservative,” on the other hand, is practically a dictionary synonym for “moderate.” What could be wrong with it? The right’s semantic victory is reflected in the fact that you hardly ever hear a Democratic politician calling himself “liberal” any more: the preferred term now is “progressive.”
But don’t be fooled--the right’s semantic victory doesn’t signal a corresponding ideological victory. That war is still being fought.