Liberalism: What happened to a great ideology?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jay74
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jay74

Guest
What makes a liberal?
by Dennis Prager

Why do people hold liberal-left positions? (Liberal and left were once very different, but not anymore.)

This question has plagued me because I have long believed that most people, liberal or conservative, mean well. Very few people wake up in the morning planning to harm society. Yet, many liberal positions – I emphasize liberal positions rather than liberals because most people who call themselves liberal do not hold most contemporary liberal positions – have been wreaking havoc on America and the world.
townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/dp20030812.shtml

What makes a liberal? Part II
by Dennis Prager

In the first part of “What Makes a Liberal?” among the points I made – but could not develop in the space of a column – was that “liberal” and “left” have become indistinguishable. This is new. And it is a tragedy for the nation and the world.

When I grew up (I became a teenager in the early 1960s), “liberal” was not only not the same as “left,” it was often anti-left. My boyhood idol (whose presidency I still admire) was President John F. Kennedy. His liberalism is my liberalism to this day.

Kennedy advocated four major positions – lower taxes, expanded military, the use of American power to fight evil, and the centrality of God to American life and to morality. Liberals and their political party, the Democrats, have since rejected each of these positions, all of which are now considered conservative.
townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/dp20030819.shtml
 
Dennis Prager is AWESOME!!!

“I didn’t leave the democrat party, it left me” --Dennis Prager
 
40.png
jlw:
Dennis Prager is AWESOME!!!

“I didn’t leave the democrat party, it left me” --Dennis Prager
He’s my favorite. I am inspired by his moral clarity and depth of analysis.

Question: How did a party that is filled with people with values – and I am a person with values – get tagged as the party without values?" – Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano

Answer: townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/dp20041109.shtml “Gov. Napolitano, I hope that this short list answers your question about how it is that your party has gotten tagged as ‘the party without values.’ Indeed, the real question, as this observer sees it, is how has this party retained so many people who have traditional American values?” – Dennis Prager
 
To my way of thinking, it died on 6/6/68 with Bobby Kennedy. He was my hero.
 
40.png
catsrus:
To my way of thinking, it died on 6/6/68 with Bobby Kennedy. He was my hero.
Too bad Ted doesn’t subscribe to the liberalism of his late family.
 
I would still be a liberal democrat, as my entire family on both sides have been since coming to this country over 100 years ago, if the democratic party was still liberal and if they had not decided to prop up their platform with the single plank of abortion. By striking at the foundation of all constitutionally protected rights of the individual, they effectively adopted a program that denies all rights.
 
40.png
jlw:
Dennis Prager is AWESOME!!!

“I didn’t leave the democrat party, it left me” --Dennis Prager
I’m not big on celebreties, but he’s an exception. He’s one of my idols.

And I got a personal email from him today!!! I emailed a question to him, and he personally responded. It made my day. 🙂
 
40.png
catsrus:
To my way of thinking, it died on 6/6/68 with Bobby Kennedy. He was my hero.
Oh mine too! Imagine had he not been killed. I think he would have been elected. Of the brothers I believe he was the most sincerely interested in REAL justice. What a shame.

Lisa N
 
Lisa N:
Oh mine too! Imagine had he not been killed. I think he would have been elected. Of the brothers I believe he was the most sincerely interested in REAL justice. What a shame.

Lisa N
What was the difference in policy between Bobby and George McGovern??

I ask in all sincerity. I don’t know.
 
JFK’s conservative tendencies asise, the Church has actually never been too hot on the idea of liberalism.

From the Catholic Encyclopedia:

III. CONDEMNATION OF LIBERALISM BY THE CHURCH

By proclaiming man’s absolute autonomy in the intellectual, moral and social order, Liberalism denies, at least practically, God and supernatural religion. If carried out logically, it leads even to a theoretical denial of God, by putting deified mankind in place of God. It has been censured in the condemnations of Rationalism and Naturalism. The most solemn condemnation of Naturalism and Rationalism was contained in the Constitution “De Fide” of the Vatican Council (1870); the most explicit and detailed condemnation, however, was administered to modern Liberalism by Pius IX in the Encyclical “Quanta cura” of 8 December, 1864 and the attached Syllabus. Pius X condemned it again in his allocution of 17 April, 1907, and in the Decree of the Congregation of the Inquisition of 3 July, 1907, in which the principal errors of Modernism were rejected and censured in sixty-five propositions. The older and principally political form of false Liberal Catholicism had been condemned by the Encyclical of Gregory XVI, “Mirari Vos”, of 15 August, 1832 and by many briefs of Pius IX (see Ségur, “Hommage aux Catholiques Libéraux”, Paris, 1875). The definition of the papal infallibility by the Vatican council was virtually a condemnation of Liberalism. Besides this many recent decisions concern the principal errors of Liberalism. Of great importance in this respect are the allocutions and encyclicals of Pius IX, Leo XIII, and Pius X. (Cf., Recueil des allocutions consistorales encycliques . . . citées dans le Syllabus", Paris, 1865) and the encyclicals of Leo XIII of 20 January, 1888, “On Human Liberty”; of 21 April, 1878, “On the Evils of Modern Society”; of 28 December, 1878, “On the Sects of the Socialists, Communists, and Nihilists”; of 4 August, 1879, “On Christian Philosophy”; of 10 February, 1880, “On Matrimony”; of 29 July, 1881, “On the Origin of Civil Power”; of 20 April, 1884, “On Freemasonry”; of 1 November, 1885, “On the Christian State”; of 25 December, 1888, “On the Christian Life”; of 10 January, 1890, “On the Chief Duties of a Christian Citizen”; of 15 May, 1891, “On the Social Question”; of 20 January, 1894, “On the Importance of Unity in Faith and Union with the Church for the Preservation of the Moral Foundations of the State”; of 19 March, 1902, “On the Persecution of the Church all over the World”. Full information about the relation of the Church towards Liberalism in the different countries may be gathered from the transactions and decisions of the various provincial councils. These can be found in the “Collectio Lacensis” under the headings of the index: Fides, Ecclesia, Educatio, Francomuratores.
 
40.png
jlw:
What was the difference in policy between Bobby and George McGovern??

I ask in all sincerity. I don’t know.
In all honesty I don’t know too much about their respective policy positions, other than I think McGovern was living in the land of Oz. I don’t think Bobby’s positions were so far into the Twilight Zone. Both were peaceniks and I understand why they might seem to be of the same cloth.

But I admired Bobby K’s strong position with respect to crime. I also think he was truly committed to civil rights. I don’t recall McGovern being so focused on real issues. He was too busy writing poetry about wolverines and living in lala land. I just saw him interviewed on Book TV and he’s still living in the 60s.

Lisa N
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top