Monday, February 13, 2006

The New Definition Of 'Liberal'

I'd still be a liberal anyway, but Glenn Greenwald nails it with this new definition of "liberal"-
Do Bush followers have a political ideology?
It used to be the case that in order to be considered a "liberal" or someone "of the Left," one had to actually ascribe to liberal views on the important policy issues of the day – social spending, abortion, the death penalty, affirmative action, immigration, "judicial activism," hate speech laws, gay rights, utopian foreign policies, etc. etc. These days, to be a "liberal," such views are no longer necessary.

Now, in order to be considered a "liberal," only one thing is required – a failure to pledge blind loyalty to George W. Bush. The minute one criticizes him is the minute that one becomes a "liberal," regardless of the ground on which the criticism is based. And the more one criticizes him, by definition, the more "liberal" one is. Whether one is a "liberal" -- or, for that matter, a "conservative" -- is now no longer a function of one’s actual political views, but is a function purely of one’s personal loyalty to George Bush.

We see this narrow definition at work in how politicians (ie. Sens. Hagel, Specter, McCain, and others) and pundits (ie. Andrew Sullivan) are decried by their fellow conservatives. Ignore that Bush has betrayed not only the values we liberals hold dear, but most of the ones conservatives do too... the conservative bases still demands total obedience.

Greenwald further examines this new base-
The anti-government ethos espoused by Barry Goldwater and even Ronald Reagan is wholly unrecognizable in Bush followers, who – at least thus far – have discovered no limits on the powers that ought to be vested in George Bush to enable him to do good on behalf of all of us.

And in that regard, people like Michelle Malkin, John Hinderaker, Jonah Goldberg and Hugh Hewitt are not conservatives. They are authoritarian cultists. Their allegiance is not to any principles of government but to strong authority through a single leader.


And that's a very scary thing.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home