What Is Liberalism? Why Does It Matter?

March 6, 2011 by
Filed under: Uncategorized 

In my previous blog post, I examined the meaning of a Conservative.  Now, let’s look at “what is a liberal?”  “Liberal” is also a word with broad meaning. Liberalism, in its intention, is a philosophy of limited personal responsibility; favoring instead the collective taking care of everyone, and placing the “overall good” – of society, of individuals, of groups – above property rights and liberty.  It is the freedom to attempt “to be,” and to be bailed out by the collective whole if you fail trying.  It is an attempt at freedom from pain, suffering, discomfort, discouragement, or failure; or else a consorted effort to make the collective suffer together those same conditions.

Liberals, or “progressives,” are people who want to move our society towards equalization by any and all means, primarily through the use of the government.  Equalization is very broad, as well.  It is an equalization of opportunity, of wealth, and of access to services (regardless of individual effort exerted), to name a few.  Liberals don’t feel that it is appropriate or fair that some people have plenty while other people are hungry, regardless if the people with plenty did without for years while studying in college, or while learning their trade; while sacrificing pleasure to build their dream into a profitable business, or while taking home a couple hundred dollars a week so they could pay their employees and keep them employed while getting their business off the ground.  Let’s not point out the fact that these are typically the people who own businesses, and thereby provide jobs by employing others.  And let’s not explore the mere possibility that the people who are hungry have spent their money on cigarettes, beer, lottery tickets, a prostitute or two, a car payment on their BMW, a vacation they financed, and mortgage payments on the house they can’t afford; and possibly even some Predators or Titans season tickets.  (I am not allowed to suggest this, or I am a “heartless and insensitive” person who doesn’t understand the plight of the “poor.”)  Remember: liberalism is equalization at any cost, in any circumstances.

I suppose I’m not allowed at this time to admit that I, personally, was raised in a single parent home with my father whom I love and respect deeply, who made less cumulatively in the 12 years I was in school than the average American makes in two years (and he NEVER took a government handout!!).  If I point out that this upbringing gave me the work ethic to start my own lawn mowing business with a friend at the age of 8, in order to make my own money to provide for my personal desires (my needs were ALWAYS met by my parents); to start milking cows and farming for my uncle at age 10; to buy my own car by 13 ½ years of age (in South Dakota, where I grew up, you could get a learner’s permit at 14) in order to more easily get myself to and from my job, without depending on others; and to buy my own clothes for the last few years of my upbringing: then I’m probably ignoring the terrible circumstances of those in need, not simply pointing out obvious self provision which used to be called “common sense.”  But I digress.

Because you see, the average conservative would read these statements, and understand the inherent sense of personal responsibility, necessity to survival, and self motivation and determination to provide for one’s self; even though I was only a child. A couple generations ago, this was just common sense and common practice.  It would have made me normal.  And amongst conservatives today, this would be encouraged and celebrated, because it represents something that we as a nation have lost, or are losing.  But, we’re not talking about me, past generations, or conservatives; we’re discussing “what is a liberal?”

A liberal would read my story, and they would not consider the points I just pointed out about my upbringing as positives.  They would instead see a breakdown in the equalization of wealth, and a concern as to why such conditions could occur in a “civilized” society.  They would ask questions such as:

  • Why was the father so poor in a country of such wealth?
  • Why were social programs not intact to eliminate the suffering of the child?
  • Why would anyone actually employ someone so young?
  • Why weren’t there reimbursement or bailout programs for a failing business?

 Set aside the fact that the reason my father was poor for many years was because he chased the American Dream of small business ownership; and eventually failed (thanks in part to government regulations and tax codes, which I’ll not dissect here), never expecting the collective to bail him out due to these circumstances.  Ignore the fact that there was no “suffering,” there was merely a lack of certain pleasures; and this lack of “pleasures”  led me to strive for attaining some of them by the sweat of my own brow, understanding that it was my responsibility to care for myself.  But again, we’re discussing liberalism, and it’s not about personal responsibility, rather collective success or failure; collective joy or suffering; collective equalization: except

Oh, I forgot to mention…with liberalism, there is always an exception!!  The exception is of course the liberal in power.  When has Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Michael Moore, Barbara Boxer, or Jim Cooper ever given their money into the collective financial pool from which we should all draw?  The last time I checked, they all have attained a great deal of wealth from the capitalist system they now seek to destroy in favor of their liberal equalization schemes.  Yet I have not found any of them who are willing to fully invest in the scheme they are perpetrating for the rest of us.  Why is that, if it truly is the answer to the evils of capitalism and the world’s plight?

This brings us to another aspect; the bilateral nature of liberalism.  To this point, I’ve discussed them, but not named them.  They can be summed up as “liberalism for the rulers” and “liberalism for the masses.”  Pelosi, Reid, Obama, Cooper; they would never give up their status to live in the misery they would create for you and me.  They’re never going to give up the spoils of their capitalistic ventures.  They will never be “equal” to you and me.  They will always be above us, and that is by their design.  With liberal utopian schemes, there is always, by design, a ruling class and a working class.  Make no mistake about it, the ruling class will never lower themselves to the working class, and the working class can never be elevated to the ruling class.  And we the working class will all be equalized…in our misery.

So, at its core, liberalism is an unattainable and illogical idea of equal results for the masses, even when unequal efforts are applied.  It is beautiful, equitable, and just in theory; but impossible and imbecilic in practicality.  It is against human nature to assume that your hard work will net you the same results as your neighbor’s half-hearted effort.  It is equally as intellectually jejune to assume that equal reward for unequal efforts will elevate the collective endeavor.  It is hypocrisy at best, and creeping enslavement at worst. 

Here is the main problem: if you don’t stand on virtuous principle, you don’t truly stand, because you have no firm foundation.  When you have no firm foundation, logical debate rips through your positions like the United States Marine Corp through a Taliban stronghold.  And liberalism stands on the backs of the enslaved, not on principle.  There is no true equality in liberalism for two main reasons, because it’s an unattainable utopian scheme and because it engenders two classes of people, which by definition will never allow equalization; by design. 

So what is liberalism and why does it matter?  Liberalism is as I have described, and it is all that is wrong with America.  And it matters because for America to stand strong in the world, as a beacon for hope and freedom, liberalism must be eradicated.  It is the job of the truly enlightened to defeat liberalism, which is perpetuated by the ignorant who have confused themselves with perceived enlightenment.  We must educate ourselves in the words, ways, and principles of Christ Jesus; in the true history of our Founders; and in the necessity of virtue for free men to properly self govern if we are to ever truly return to our conservative roots.  If we do not, the misery will be equally shared by all. 

Well; almost all…..

Comments

Tell me what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!





Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

order antabuse online