Liberalism- Old And New

Liberalism: Old and New The Norman Transcript April 22, 2006 12:15 am — For The Transcript In varying degrees disorder seems to beset everything. The causes are endless, but one sure source of confusion is careless use of words -- those artificial symbols we use to manipulate ideas and to communicate. Political words are often demons. In contemporary American politics we use terms like "liberal" and "conservative" with slipshod abandon. Sometimes we use them with derogatory intent, sometimes with complimentary intent, but our casual attention to precision and clarity can result in limited understanding and increased befuddlement. One of the oldest uses of the word "liberal" carries us back to classical Greece. Aristotle used it when analyzing education. For him there was a difference between the education we need for leisure and the education needed for practical affairs. Since reason is superior to utility, he argued, what we need is education that "is liberal ... something good in itself." Therefore, the most valuable education is that which cultivates the mind, which promotes thinking, has no immediate practical application, frees us from the narrow concerns of the physical and is, in short, a "liberal education." The power of such ideas is forcefully illustrated by the fact that they have come down to us through the centuries and still have a divisive influence among institutions of higher learning and within individual colleges and universities. From the decline of classical Greece to the modern period education in the West has been dominated by the Church, theology and the intellectual studies derived from Greece and Rome. For many centuries clerical authoritarianism was the paramount educational and political power. Words like "liberal" and "conservative" play little role in the literature of these years, although their meanings are expressed in the struggles for dominance, struggles for and against clerical authority and the desire for intellectual and religious freedom. The growth of "capitalism" is entwined with the words "liberal" and "conservative." All three of these words are not only interrelated, they are also mixed in the rise of modern "nationalism" and the ideals of the English, American and French revolutions. One reason we stumble over meanings is the fact that many uncritically see "democracy" and "capitalism" as synonymous, and in our early history labeled them as "liberal." Proponents wanted government to be free of monarchy, oligarchy and other vested interests and the economy to be free of mercantilism and other restraints upon business enterprise. The democratic revolutions and the growth of the Classical School of Economics -- typified by Adam Smith, David Ricardo, James Mill and his son John Stuart Mill -- were powerful forces in shaping emerging "liberalism." These were some of the finest minds in the history of economic thought. There were, however, continental members of the Classical School, but it was the English who exerted the most influence. Thoughtful people understand that everything changes including ideas and institutions. "Liberalism" as it evolved in the modern period emphasized freedom for the development of individuals, freedom from government, laws and restrictive institutions and has been growing and changing for centuries. It reached fruition in the 19th century, and is well summed up in American constitutional government, the Bill of Rights, checks and balances and in economies as "free enterprise." We have much to learn from historians, philosophers and sociologists. They show us how institutions change, how ideas both grow and erode and how they influence one another. Also the industrial revolution has revolutionized the world forcing us to think differently. And social change, especially evident in the Great Depression, the rise of Communism and Fascism and the shattering influence of World War II and "The Bomb" have changed how we think about institutions and the language we use to consider our condition. All these disorders have shifted the meaning of "liberalism." Especially FDR and the New Deal helped us think of this principle as one emphasizing the use of government to relieve human suffering, to use

government to promote employment, to use government to relieve unemployed workers and farmers suffering from a deranged market place. In short they helped return hope to an ailing society and a faltering market place. In short they helped return hope to an ailing society and a faltering economy. One of the greatest ironies in American history is the hostility of the business community, and its "conservative" allies, to FDR and efforts to use government financial aid for public welfare. In the 1930s the economic choice for America was rapidly narrowing to Fascism or Communism. Roosevelt's "liberalism" saved the American capitalist system. The fruits of honorable intention are sometimes bitter, for following World War II the political far right has increasingly used the New Deal gains and Roosevelt's "liberalism" as the target for their hostility, but tragically, their contribution to American politics is anxiety, confusion and stalling efforts to solve pressing problems. A "liberal" is one who wants to use government to solve social problems and relieve human distress. Clear definitions always contribute to clear thought, and clear thought contributes to prudent behavior. America seems to have reached its pinnacle of eminence at the end of World War II. Since then we appear to have been slipping. Whether that tendency will continue or be reversed is conjectural. Certainly prudent and lucid political discourse -- necessarily based on clear understanding of the words we use -- will help us successfully navigate the future. What may "save" us is twofold: we have time, albeit diminishing, and we have an abundance of intelligence. The problem is to use them promptly and wisely. Lloyd Williams is a retired educator. His column runs in The Transcript every other Saturday. Copyright © 1999-2008 cnhi, inc.