LIBERAL: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin liberalis suitable for a freeman, generous, from liber free; perhaps akin to Old English lēodan to grow, Greek eleutheros free. First Known Use: 14th century
Liberals don’t just know different things than conservatives, we know things differently. We hold knowledge in different ways. We are open to nuance and complication: generous, free, open to growth.
This is our strength. It makes our thinking supple. It allows us to appreciate richness and diversity. It allows us to appreciate a variety of options before choosing one.
It is also our weakness. It makes us more likely to dither (“sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought”) and perhaps compromise too much. Ironically, it also makes us less able to unite and cohere in a group: we splinter because we appreciate complication.
The model for liberal groups is the academy: splintered, but rich with diversity. The model for conservative thinking is the military, able to act with great unity, but homogenous.
Which is why I hate dueling DKos rec list diaries. To me, they smack of a “you’re either with us or against us” approach. That is, I think they are fundamentally not liberal; they are absolute and confrontational. Obama’s great, or he’s worthless. That is the kind of thinking I associate with the right: it is conservative, rigid, and closed.
Especially when it’s pretty clear that Obama’s record is decidedly mixed. You’d have to be willfully ignorant not to appreciate some of the accomplishments of this administration. And you’d have to be willfully ignorant not to be disappointed in other things.
How can you not support?
Ledbetter
two minority women on the court
the repeal of DADT
the bailout of the Automakers
all the money for Green initiatives in the stimulus
the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
the money for community health centers in Affordable Care Act, or letting children stay on their parents insurance longer
the increased money for Pell Grants
How can you not dislike?
the pace of the draw downs in the Middle East
the failure to get Gitmo closed, regardless of difficulties in Congress
the bullshit about “evolving” on Gay marriage
the support of the Patriot Act
the ready acceptance of right-wing terms of the budget debate
the failure to hold Wall Street accountable for the financial collapse
The failure to fight harder for a more left-leaning healthcare bill
and generally not being more willing to risk confronting the right wing
That’s what I don’t get. Don’t get me wrong: even if we all agreed the President’s record was mixed, we wouldn’t all reach the same conclusions. Some would think he needed to be primaried, since he has allowed the right to frame the national conversation so fully that his administation is pushing the “overton window” further right, and that we can’t handle another four years of that—regardless of whatever good he might have done. Others would think he’s accomplishing terrific things despite a corporatist media, conservative Dems in Congress, and the infiltration of money in politics, despite having to make some ugly compromises.
BUT, and here’s my point, we wouldn’t be devolving into two web sites: a pro-Obama one and an anti-Obama one, in which people speak with real vitriol. That devolution is by its nature conservative: it is the “You’re either with us or against us” mentality. It is fundamentally anti-liberal. And, more than that, I think it makes us little different than the conservatives we fight against: the medium (the method) is the ideology--if not at first, then over time.
With the economy getting worse and the rise of right-wing hatred, things feel rocky. I suspect what we need in the country is more liberal thinking, not more militancy, more rigidity, more conservatism. Violence (even the violence of intolerance on a blog post) can feel good, but it leads to splintering. That’s true nationally—as the right wing barely consider us liberals American—and it’s true within the left, too. We are more powerful when we find and act on our common ground. I’m all for productive debate, but what I’m seeing here looks a lot more vitriolic than that. United, we stand.