FACEOFF:

What is a Liberal?

by Kent Moreno

What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then we are not that kind of "Liberal".  But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not
behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."
-       John F. Kennedy, September 14, 1960

A study conducted in 2006 by the Pew Research Group and editorialized by conservative George Will found that in comparison to liberals, a larger percentage of conservatives, consider themselves to be happy. What's fascinating about this study is the explanation as to the disparity in happiness between the two groups.  The study found that conservatives tend to value personal freedom over fairness and are more pessimistic.  As such they are less troubled by inequalities and injustices in society.  Liberals place great value on fairness and equal opportunity.  As such, it weighs heavily upon us, when American society doesn‚t live up to the
ideals set forth by the founding fathers.  True patriotism requires more than blind allegiance, it demands honest evaluation and diligence of effort.

Many of the cornerstones ascribed to modern civilized society; civil rights, the five-day work week, overtime, the minimum wage, unemployment, Social Security, voting rights, civil rights, medical care for the poor and elderly... all had their genesis at the hands of liberal presidents and congresses.

To quote Abraham Lincoln, liberals believe in a government "Of the people by the people and for the people." Prior to July 4, 1776, citizens were subjects of the King rather than the owners of their government.  That the Declaration of Independence should contain the words "all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to insure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed," was a radical notion.  Such words demand that the government govern in a manner that embraces and
promotes (not guarantees)  these unalienable rights for all Americans. It is in the spirit of the Declaration of Independence and the Gettysburg address that liberals view the individual without regard to class or affluence as the benchmark by which the government must base its
decisions.

Contrary to the cheap political tactics of the recent election, liberals believe in capitalism.  History clearly shows that the financial incentives of capitalism result in greater wealth creation and technological progress for society as a whole.  That liberals should
embrace equal opportunity and fairness does not overlook individual responsibility and industry with regard to personal and financial success.

Rather, it makes the statement that "America is the land of opportunity, if you work hard, you'll have a fair chance at success and a decent standard of living." America's economic success, past, present, and future is and will be tied to the existence of a large and thriving middle
class. To put the needs of the citizenry first does not mean that it is done at the expense of business.  To suggest otherwise ignores the fact that the citizenry and business are interdependent.  When the interdependence of the citizenry and business is ignored, economic woe results.  When industry is favored at expense of the citizenry, we see economic failures
indicative of our current situation or a huge disparity between the rich and the poor with large segments of the population living in poverty.  When the citizenry is favored at the expense of business one sees economic problems similar to those of Venezuela, a country with a 28% inflation rate, a stagnant economy, and food shortages.

In order to provide a government "Of the people, by the people and for the people", liberals believe in "active government." We see government as the quarterback.  It is the responsibility of the quarterback to coordinate an economic policy that is equitable to all Americans and beneficial to business.  And, it is the responsibility of the quarterback to create the protections and supports necessary, to increase the likelihood that all Americans have a fair chance at "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."

Lastly, please note my liberal guilt over taking unfair advantage of the space but, Happy 18th Birthday Megan!!!  Té Amo Mijita!!!

FACEOFF:

What is a Conservative?

by Stephen Smoot

I have to be honest.  When teaching class, I avoid the words "liberal" and "conservative" as often as possible.  Both words have meanings that change so much over time.  They also mean different things to different people with some of those personalized definitions bringing about volatile reactions.  It makes more sense in a classroom to use very precise language that is less antagonistic.  Here, in this forum, we are trying to rile people up so we let slip such words like Shakespeare's dogs of war.  The battle is half the fun, but some still question exactly what these
words mean.  When it comes to conservatism, I like to say there are two general types, both represented by a "Bill."

The first is "Bill" Buckley, an economic conservative.  William F. Buckley was a former CIA agent, political figure, and newspaper columnist.  He embodied the phrase that America is a conservative country, but that the values it conserves are fairly radical.  These values come from the original revolutionary principles that motivated Americans to rebel against unfair taxation, restriction of economic opportunity, and ever increasing governmental power.  Such principles themselves originated in the English concept that rights come from God or nature, not a government.

Buckley passionately defended the ideals of limited government even to the point of accepting some social ills, such as prostitution, as the cost of freedom. Economic conservatives fight hardest against expansion of government power and the raising of taxes.  Tax increases for social purposes represent a theft of an individual‚s reward for work or risk.  Redistribution of wealth is an attack on the individual's right to property.   Buckley often described himself not as a conservative, but as a libertarian.  This is also the type I believe in most of the time.

The second type is the "Bill" Bennett school.  William Bennett was Ronald Reagan's Secretary of Education and is one of the country's leading social conservatives.  Social conservatives fight to maintain what they see as America's traditional values of family, culture, and individual behavior.
They struggle against gay marriage, pornography, and support religious expression in schools.  Bennett himself has run afoul of this movement.  His Catholic faith does not prohibit gambling or cigarette smoking, but Bennett voluntarily stopped both after being called a moral hypocrite.

It's easy to see how these two ideologies might have trouble coexisting in the same movement.  An economic conservative will often either support, or just not fight, the expansion of gambling.  He or she will see it as the right of each individual to choose what to do with their money while the social conservative sees the problems created within families of addicts. 

Other issues find both sides in agreement.  For example, almost every conservative opposes abortion.  Social conservatives argue the immorality of killing children.  Economic conservatives often contend that each innocent individual, as stated in the Declaration of Independence, has the right to life.  A woman has the right to choose, but a conservative will say that in the vast majority of cases the act was voluntarily and that both parents have to deal with the consequences of their choices. Having differing schools of thought within the overall conservative movement can help and hurt. 

The ongoing conversation about conservatism's meaning helps to keep the movement fresh and forward thinking.  Competition, even in the field of ideas, produces positive movement. Without new ideas and approaches, conservatism would lapse into reaction, a mindless defense of the past.  When we say we want to be conservative, it is not methods, but principles that we wish to maintain.  Changing times and situations require new ways, but we should judge those against
our fundamental values.

On the other hand, differing philosophies produce varied viewpoints on politics and life.  It is easy to attack a politician who calls himself conservative, but drinks and has had repeated failed marriages.  He may never have discussed "family values" in his life, but opponents will call
him hypocritical simply because of his self-identification as a conservative.   That is why in political debates, labels and categories are helpful.  It is an effective device to slap a label on an opponent because it places on that person or group a set of assumptions either positive or negative.  It is also why in the classroom setting I prefer to use specific terms such as "social conservative" or "free market advocate."

Finally when thinking of the conservative movement, you cannot forget the heroes.  We see George Washington and Alexander Hamilton dreaming about a prosperous future, but also Jefferson who warned against too much government.  Of course we celebrate Ronald Reagan who combined the desire or restrained government with an enduring faith in America and Christian traditions.  For the conservative movement to thrive today, we must remember  principles, but adjust our approach and carry forward.