Liberalism

 I've been thinking about how Putin said liberalism was 'obsolete'.

Okay, more seriously I was thinking about how there seems to be a concerted effort to undermine liberalism, and while he's not the sole person behind it I'm sure he's part of it.

And I understand why Russians would dislike 'the West'. I understand that after two major invasions of their country they really wanted satellite nations as a buffer, and there was the whole NATO thing, and they feel threatened... (I don't claim to understand it at an expert level, but I get the broad brushstrokes)...

But I don't really see what that has to do with liberalism, or why Putin takes issue with it. You could even argue that the problematic parts of 'the West' aren't their liberalism. It's more the imperialism, colonialism, and non-liberal elements that are softened by liberalism.

But that term gets thrown out a lot, often as a dirty word, and I decided to actually look up the definition. (I kind of get confused about liberal vs. progressive vs Democrat vs whatever other term is used for various factions on the left. So much of them seem interchangeable, but they're clearly not. At least, not to the people arguing over what the Democrats should do.)

Here's the definition that most closely fits how I understood it: "a supporter of a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise."

I suppose the vitriol is reserved for the other definition: "a supporter of policies that are socially progressive and promote social welfare."

I don't really see why either of these deserve so much hatred, though I suppose the second one is just a handy way of describing whoever conservatives (who don't want to promote social welfare, apparently. And oppose progressive policies on principle) hate.

But let's go back to the first one.

Individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise.  

That sounds very American to me. As American as apple pie. Like, I have a hard time understanding how anyone who considers themselves a patriot would say that they don't support these things.

Individual rights? Like freedom of speech and the right to bear arms?

Civil liberties? Also includes freedom of speech, right to assembly, right to a fair trial, and more.

Democracy? I can't not believe that supposedly patriotic Americans have actually started using the 'we're a republic, not a democracy' line. I mean, it's something I've known for decades... 

but only because it had been the sort of nitpicky thing political scientists cared about. It's not exactly one or the other, or that having one means you can't have the other. We're a republic, yes. But we use democracy to choose who represents us. And democracy is a very important way of choosing who represents us. 

They should represent the will of the people. There's a whole very long history behind all of this. The social contract, the importance of having a government that governs on behalf of all its citizens. I don't understand how you can claim to care about Western values and history and ignore some of it's better achievements. 

The problem is that these people don't seem to care about the social contract or the will of the people when said will might go against what they, personally, want. (Do we really have to prove all over again why minority rule is so bad?)

Free enterprise? Liberals aren't against capitalism. Not by this definition. Now, we can go into the second definition (progressive policies and promotes social welfare), but that's the sort of thing I'd expect to get resolved in a healthy fashion. Through debate and elections. 

It hardly seems the sort of thing that justifies the hatred and knee-jerk reaction conservatives use. (I've seen takes that focus on extreme opinions on said progressive policies and use it to claim modern liberals have given up civil liberties and democracy... but in my lifetime none of the people pushing those ideas has gotten into a position to truly threaten that. Conservatives don't see it that way, I know. But no... your children are not being indoctrinated by 'liberal' professors and your concerns about 'cancel culture' are highly exaggerated. There's always edge cases, doesn't mean that's the reality for most of us. Plus there's the problematic way that their efforts to control the narrative lead to the very same suppression of ideas. Like trying to outlaw teaching true facts about our history, just because they make white people look bad. Apparently we can't handle learning the truth.)

I think what shocks me is this.

I knew there was a lot of debate over those edge cases. Over 'political correctness', or now 'wokeism', or 'critical race theory'. But every time I see a story that seems concerning - by which I mean it's not overhyped and overexaggerated, and you have to wonder why the hell anyone thought it was a good idea - it generally gets a lot of attention and then gets fixed. Or we learn that there was more to it than that, and maybe it actually was a good idea. Either way, it's not going to destroy America.

But overturning an election? Voter suppression? Creating a system that caters to a minority and ignores the wishes of the vast majority of Americans?

That will. That absolutely will. 

I don't understand how people who claim they value 'freedom', claim they value America, claim they love our country... can then turn around and justify putting in place a system that will destroy all of that.

Do the morons arguing that we should forcibly remove elected officials who don't do what a small minority of the people who elected that official want honestly think that's freedom? 

That's basically what the brownshirts were. They use violence to suppress dissent... and you can't do that and claim to care about the rule of law and democracy. Not with any integrity.

The reason we use elections to settle these issues is that it's a hella lot better than deciding by whoever is the most violent. Once you open that door, it's not long before the people who disagree with you follow your lead and do your same, and we degenerate into infighting and possible civil war.

It's a terrible idea, and the people behind it are terrible people. I don't care why they think it's justified. Whatever it is, they are wrong. 

Anyways, you really have to wonder why there's such a concerted effort to undermine liberalism. What's so scary about it? What are you offering that's better? 

Because all I'm seeing are forces hell bent on forcing us to prove all over again how terrible authoritarianism and minority rule are.