Month: September 2009
A friend used the word “liberal” this weekend and it sounded so odd at this point in time.
The looney left, for a least 50-60 years, has made very good inroads into redefining our language to suit their perverted needs:
The focus of this missive is to discuss the evolution of the word “liberal”. F.A. Hayek, in his “Road To Serfdom”, noted, to my surprise, how leftists had appropriated the word “liberal” over half a century ago. My opinion is that it evolved over time since classic liberal circles were fertile grounds for discussions about other economic systems, be they communist or Nazi or socialistic or capitalistic. The problem is there was a disconnect around the end of World War II and most non-USA countries clung to the old definition of “liberal”, while, in the U.S.A., the communists and leftists and socialists and their ilk gradually changed the hidden meaning of liberal such that true classic liberals were sucked into a new way of thinking and seemed to have no way to escape.
Recently, Hillary Clinton was labeled as a liberal and she said she preferred the “progressive” designation. Hmmm. Watch for shifting terminology use. It seems the word “liberal” has become diluted, much the same as the word “racist” is now becoming. Progressive is a very old term that has come back into favor since it has such a nice ring to it.
Let’s cut through the bovine excrement and just call them “leftists”. If these leftists start to use force, call them “communists”. Using the word “socialist” as a economic descriptor is difficult because most countries use varying levels of socialism and this can lead to endless arguments about what level of government control of an economy is too much or too little.
I’m pretty sure I got one “conservative” talk show host to change his terminology from “liberal” to “leftist”. I can only hope you will do the same.
I regret that Michael Savage’s saying, “Liberalism is a mental disorder”, will have to be changed to, “Leftists need psychiatric help.” Someone needs to wordsmith this a bit.
P.S. I will avoid the “conservative” definition can of worms for the moment. 😉