Tuesday, January 29, 2008

A rose by any other name...

We all know that quote, and it may be true. But it's also true that giving something that doesn't smell like a rose an attractive name will make it more appealing, at least initially. Take the term "liberal." If you didn't know any better, you would think a liberal was someone who was committed to freedom and liberty. You would think a liberal would praise economic as well as individual liberty, and in general advocate freedom from government intervention. This was true up until the end of the nineteenth century, perhaps even as late as the New Deal era, but it is no longer true today.

Today, a true liberal has to be called a "classical liberal" or a libertarian in order to distinguish him from a left-wing Democrat, with which "liberal" has now become conflated. Those of us on the right have helpfully given the word over without a fight, with all of its positive connotations. Even better, we now use it as a four-letter word: You're such a bleeding heart liberal! No one on the right wants to be called a liberal, but that's exactly what we should want to be called. We need to take our word back.

Those of us who believe in liberty, true liberty, ought to stop looking at "liberal" in the specious context in which it is now used, and instead look at it in the context in which it ought to be, and so recently was, used. True liberty is about having the right to make choices for yourself (even bad ones), to keep your own money, to live without excessive government intervention. Real liberals know this. Left-wingers don't believe in true liberty, so they don't deserve to be called liberals. (Believing in a woman's right to choose does not make you a true liberal when you also believe in taking gun rights away from lawful citizens. With liberty, it's an all or nothing proposition.) Stop letting them (and helping them) smear "liberal" with meanings that have nothing to do with liberty, and start taking it back.

"Bleeding heart left-winger" doesn't have the same ring to it, but it sure is a lot more accurate.

No comments: