reasonable.
The central point of my essay was that the Right
has pulled the Center too far to the right; and if we need any
further proof of that, simply look at our political language (as
will history).
The "ideal" candidate, for either party, is
generally described as "conservative" on fiscal matters and "moderate" on social issues. The conventional wisdom is that
it is not only "politically incorrect" but also political
poison to be branded "liberal" on any issue (when absolutely
necessary, one may gingerly call one's position "progressive"). As things stand, that is not an unreasonable
conclusion.
However, a great political party gets out in
front and leads the nation; it does not achieve greatness by
merely pandering to the lowest common denominator of existing
public opinion. Although not all Democrats are liberals, nor
should we be of but a single mindset, why must "liberalism"
be so roundly condemned, even by ourselves, as a dirty word? Is "liberalism" something to be ashamed of? Is
"liberalism"
a foolish or immoral creed, inherently repugnant to Americans?
In 1960, when he was running for President, John
F. Kennedy was asked, "What is a liberal?" He
answered: "I believe in human dignity as the source of
national purpose, in human liberty as the source of national
action, in the human heart as the source of national compassion,
and in the human mind as the source of our invention and our
ideas...For liberalism is not so much a party creed or set of
fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind and heart,
a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his reason
and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men the
amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all human
life deserves...For the liberal society is a free society, and
it is at the same time and for that reason a strong
society."
The United States of America was founded upon
quintessentially liberal principles, of which it has been a
champion in the world ever since.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
bravely seek religious freedom and a new life in the wilderness
of a New World.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
establish effective services for all the public, from the post
office, public libraries, paved roads, and city lighting to
public hospitals and police and fire-fighting forces (Thank you,
Dr. Franklin).
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
break away from the monarchy of the Mother Country in order to
establish the modern world's first great democratic republic.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
establish a Constitution (much imitated around the world) with a
separation and balance of powers within the federal government
and between the federal and state governments as well as a Bill
of Rights for its individual citizens.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
establish public education.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
free the slaves.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
extend voting rights to non-landowners, to African Americans, to
women, and to 18-year-olds.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
establish laws protecting workers in the workplace and consumers
in the marketplace.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
bust trusts.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
devise federal regulations to protect the banking and investment
industries and, hence, the life-savings of our citizens and the
economic life of our nation.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
create Social Security.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
fight and defeat worldwide the forces of Fascism (the most
extreme wing of the Right, just as Anarchy is the extreme wing
of the Left).
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
rebuild our former enemies after World War II and, thus, not
repeat our mistake after World War I.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
establish the United Nations, to increase international
cooperation in solving fundamental human problems and in
guaranteeing basic human rights and, thus, to help prevent
future, potentially apocalyptic world wars.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
devise safe and effective methods of birth control.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
outlaw racial segregation and to protect voting rights.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
go out of our way to care for the least of our brothers and
sisters.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
create Medicare.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
vow to set foot on the Moon and to achieve that daring dream, as
old as mankind.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
establish the EPA and to try to protect Mother Earth from
rapacious interests.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
protect a woman's right to choose to do as she wishes with her
own body...and it will be liberal -- that is, open-minded -- thinking that will eventually resolve the remaining debate on
"when does truly human life begin?" (Here's a
"Fact of Life": Truly human thought, feeling, and
awareness -- that is, "brain life" -- develops
neurologically in the third trimester, remarkably in line with
the limits established by Roe vs. Wade and analogous to the
defining of human death as brain death).
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
end a war with no end in Southeast Asia.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
expose and root out corruption at the highest levels of
government.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
at least try to guarantee equal pay for equal work by both the
sexes.
It was liberal, not conservative or moderate, to
outlaw discrimination based upon marital status, sexual
orientation, or physical abilities.
It was inherently liberal, not conservative or
moderate, to extend human knowledge -- and, thus, power -- to
billions worldwide via the Internet (just ask anyone denied such
information by the censors in a dictatorship).
Of course, conservatism has its uses -- as by
balancing budgets, we can afford to sustain progressive causes --
as does moderation -- anything can be taken to extremes.
But the fact remains, without liberalism,
America would not have become the America we know and love
today.
Let us not be radical, but let us not be ashamed
to call ourselves liberal whenever we strive to increase human
liberty. We must not insult our liberal heritage by taking for
granted the benefits of hard-fought struggles down through human
history. To do so is to invite the center to be pulled ever
farther to the right, upsetting whatever balance of power there
is in the country, to an end as un-American as every enemy we
have ever fought.
If we do not defend liberalism, who will?
Sincerely,
Doug Drenkow
A Moderate Liberal