Straight-ticket GOP voters and social conservatives have often used the word, “liberal” as a political smear against their perceived opponents in both the mainstream and alternative media. This bugs me to no end, for there is nothing immoral or un-American about liberalism at all. Without liberals, who would have made the Enlightenment happen?
According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the word “liberal” is defined as:
“mid-14c., ‘generous,’ also, late 14c., ‘selfless; noble, nobly born; abundant,’ and, early 15c., in a bad sense ‘extravagant, unrestrained,’ from Old French liberal ‘befitting free men, noble, generous, willing, zealous’ (12c.), from Latin liberalis ‘noble, gracious, munificent, generous,’ literally ‘of freedom, pertaining to or befitting a free man,’ from liber ‘free, unrestricted, unimpeded; unbridled, unchecked, licentious,' from PIE *leudh-ero-, probably originally 'belonging to the people’ (though the precise semantic development is obscure; compare frank (adj.)), and a suffixed form of the base *leudh- ‘people’ (cognates: Old Church Slavonic ljudu, Lithuanian liaudis, Old English leod, German Leute ‘nation, people;’ Old High German liut ‘person, people’).”
The entry goes on to say that “liberal,” similar to the word, “liberty,” at one point was unfairly considered equivalent to the word, “libertine,” as in the sense of free from restraint in speech, action, or good taste, but then was successfully restored during the Enlightenment as meaning free from prejudice and in favor of tolerance.
Yet, notice that there is a difference between tolerance and acceptance. Tolerance means that I will abstain from initiating force and coercing you to do whatever I want. Acceptance goes further by implying that I actually like you. For example, I tolerate Christianity, and I accept punk rock, not the other way around!
In terms of political philosophy and/or public policy, I believe that my following positions are consistent with liberalism:
• I am fervently anti-war.
• I despise corporatism.
• I recognize the separation of church and state.
• I oppose police militarization.
• I tolerate Muslims and homosexuals.
• I detest the outlawry of cannabis.
• I support the total abolition of the National Security Agency.
• My political allies include freegans and mutualists.
Consider also the proud intellectual tradition liberalism can lay claim to. John Locke, Jean-Baptiste Say, Frédéric Bastiat, Alexis de Tocqueville, Gustave de Molinari, Herbert Spencer, and Ludwig von Mises are the developers of our political ideology, the last of whom has been described as “the last knight of liberalism.” Interestingly, as David Freidman once pointed out:
“In the 19th century, the political philosophy that supported small government and free markets was called ‘liberalism.’ Unfortunately, between then and now, the enemies of liberalism succeeded in stealing its name, which is why people with similar views nowadays usually call themselves, ‘libertarians.’”
I think it is high time to return to our roots. If, indeed, the liberals of today truly believe in cultural tolerance and social progress, then they must live up to their namesake by tolerating firearms ownership and even capitalism. That means refraining from lobbying bureaucrats and legislators to impose background checks or raising the minimum wage. It implies following the example of the
17th century English Levellers, the
18th century republicans, and even the
19th century socialists. Marching headlong towards authoritarianism isn’t progressive, it’s regressive back into the tyrannies of medieval Europe.
So, yes, I am a liberal, in the truest sense of the word. I believe in free minds and (genuinely) free markets. Neither I nor anyone else needs regulatory permission from bureaucrats in order to enjoy our common liberties. Only once progressives truly appreciate the public liberty the Founding Fathers often mentioned will the mostly French liberalism they claim to uphold be truly manifested in the real world.