{"id":6609,"date":"2016-10-30T19:04:32","date_gmt":"2016-10-30T19:04:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/?p=6609"},"modified":"2016-10-30T19:04:32","modified_gmt":"2016-10-30T19:04:32","slug":"word-liberal-up-for-grabs","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/blog\/2016\/10\/word-liberal-up-for-grabs\/","title":{"rendered":"If the Word “Liberal” Is Up for Grabs, Can We Have It Back? – Article by Jeffrey A. Tucker"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>\n
\n
\"The<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
Jeffrey Tucker<\/span>
\n<\/big><\/big><\/strong><\/div>\n
******************************<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n

A spectacular column<\/span><\/a> in <\/span>The New York Times<\/span><\/em> by novelist <\/span>Lionel Shriver<\/span><\/a> makes the point. The new literary and academic establishment in the humanities has become so illiberal, particularly in its preposterous condemnation of \u201ccultural appropriation,\u201d that even the word liberal itself is falling out of fashion. <\/span><\/p>\n

It\u2019s so bad that Shriver was denounced and condemned for arguing that it is just fine for novelists to write characters into their work that are not of the same cultural, racial, and demographic background of the writer. Not very controversial, right?<\/span><\/p>\n

Explosion followed. Yes, that\u2019s how bad it\u2019s gotten out there. The literary habit that built civilization, the musical tactic that brought us the Nutcracker and Carmen, the technological tendency that build modernity from the Middle Ages to the present, the political rhetoric that ended slavery and emancipated women, the artistic strategy that has brought the world together in mutual understanding and in unprecedented ways, now stands condemned as the micro-aggression of cultural appropriation. <\/span><\/p>\n

She writes:<\/span><\/p>\n

How did the left in the West come to embrace restriction, censorship and the imposition of an orthodoxy at least as tyrannical as the anti-Communist, pro-Christian conformism I grew up with? Liberals have ominously relabeled themselves \u201cprogressives,\u201d forsaking a noun that had its roots in \u201cliber,\u201d meaning free. To progress is merely to go forward, and you can go forward into a pit.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Protecting freedom of speech involves protecting the voices of people with whom you may violently disagree. In my youth, liberals would defend the right of neo-Nazis to march down Main Street. I cannot imagine anyone on the left making that case today.<\/span><\/p>\n

It\u2019s right. The people who stole the word liberal \u00a0\u2013 gradually circa 1900-1933 \u2013 seem to be in the process of tossing out the last modicum of respect for liberty they had even as recently as ten years ago. If you are considered a thief for showing appreciation for other cultures, learning from people unlike yourself, using art and literature to draw attention to certain human universals, there is really nothing left of liberty. <\/span><\/p>\n

If these are your views, you really should relinquish the word liberal. And the truly great thing is that this is happening right now thus leaving it, perhaps, to be reappropriated by actual lovers of liberty. <\/span><\/p>\n

Do Not Talk about Beyonc\u00e9\u2019s Lemonade!<\/strong><\/p>\n

I experienced the intolerance for disruptive ideas earlier this year in the strangest way. Beyonc\u00e9\u2019s Lemonade \u2013 a feature-length pop operetta about betrayal and forgiveness \u2013 \u00a0had just come out. I devoured it, was challenged by it, learned from it, and found themes within it that I was ready to write about: particularly the Hayekian themes I found in the work. <\/span><\/p>\n

However, just as I started putting together my thoughts, the Internet filled up with dire warnings: if you are a white man, do not write about Beyonc\u00e9\u2019s Lemonade! <\/span><\/p>\n

I <\/span>can\u2019t<\/span><\/a> write about Beyonc\u00e9\u2019s Lemonade? Really? Why not? Because it is a story about the experience of black women in America, and it would be disrespectful to appropriate this experience and this art to serve your own private desire to interpret the work. <\/span><\/p>\n

Others took a more moderate position: do not <\/span>yet<\/span> write about Beyonc\u00e9\u2019s Lemonade. Give it a few days, a few weeks, a few months, so as to allow women of color to at least have the first chance to comment and write. <\/span><\/p>\n

Now, I can\u2019t say I was entirely intimidated to silence by this demand. However, I did hesitate, maybe briefly perceiving some plausibility to the claim. It makes some sense that the intended audience would become the dominant voice of interpretation. I\u2019m ok with that, but would my adding my voice somehow prohibit this? I doubt it, seriously. <\/span><\/p>\n

Still, I was thinking. So I let it go. The next day, I actually asked a \u201cwoman of color\u201d who is a friend, and she said, \u201cthat\u2019s the dumbest thing I\u2019ve ever heard. I want to know what you as a white man have to say about this!\u201d That was cool, but I felt the moment passing. <\/span><\/p>\n

Did I really relish hurling myself into the meat grinder of leftist fanaticism, being condemned as a racist cultural appropriator because I dared to say something about Beyonc\u00e9\u2019s Lemonade? Not much. It is always easier not to speak than to speak. <\/span><\/p>\n

As I look back, this was a mistake on my part, but it does illustrate how illiberalism and dogmatic demands to keep your thoughts to yourself can have a chilling effect on public culture. <\/span><\/p>\n

Who Is Against Freedom of Speech Today?<\/strong><\/p>\n

In the postwar period, the mantle of principle on the matter of free speech moved from left to right. Recall that William F. Buckley\u2019s God and Man at Yale<\/em> (1953) was essentially an argument against academic freedom. It said that leftists were invoking this principle to advocate for ideas (atheism and Keynesianism) that contradict the values of the donating alumni to Yale itself. It was due to this erudite but essentially illiberal treatise that the postwar right gained the impression of being \u201canti-intellectual.\u201d<\/p>\n

What a difference sixty years make. Today the organizations most passionately for academic freedom and freedom of speech are the Young Americans for Liberty, the Students for Liberty, and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education \u2013 three organizations that, rightly or wrongly, are considered to be on the right side of the political debate. At this very time, the other side has developed a kind of allergy to the demand for free speech. Everyone is triggered by everyone else. <\/span><\/p>\n

Around the same time, Leonard Read and his circle deeply regretted the loss of the term liberal. With some reservations and lingering doubts, they <\/span>revived<\/span><\/a> the term libertarian as a substitute. It was supposed to be a synonym. But IMHO, it\u2019s not nearly as good because it lacks the history, the broadness of mind, the high aspiration for society as a whole. <\/span><\/p>\n

The True Meaning of Liberal<\/strong><\/p>\n

There really is only one way forward. That is the way offered by the liberal tradition \u2013 a tradition variously and pragmatically sampled by the left and the right but not really believed in full by either. After all, if your ambition is to control society, you can\u2019t really claim the mantle. <\/span><\/p>\n

It\u2019s a beautiful thing that the word itself seems to have been abandoned by all modern political players, who prefer other terms. Fine. Liberalism has the most brilliant heritage in every language. It means individual rights, freedom of expression and enterprise and association, suspicion of government, and a confidence that society can organize itself better on its own without any institution making and enforcing a central plan. <\/span><\/p>\n

Liberalism built civilization. It makes sense that the word would be abandoned when the dominant players in politics today have every interest in tearing it down by circumscribing freedom. But therein lies an opportunity. <\/span><\/p>\n

In 2015 I made a <\/span>commitment<\/span><\/a> to stop using the term liberal in a derogatory way. I think I\u2019ll complete this year by committing to using it in a completely positive way. Will you join me? We might be the only self-described liberals in the United States, and, perhaps then, we can make a contribution to regaining the term\u2019s true meaning. <\/span><\/p>\n

Or we might just say, reappropriate it. <\/span><\/p>\n

\"Jeffrey<\/a>Jeffrey Tucker<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

Jeffrey Tucker<\/strong> is Director of Content for the\u00a0Foundation for Economic Education<\/a>\u00a0and CLO of the startup\u00a0Liberty.me<\/a>.\u00a0Author of five books, and many thousands of articles, he speaks at FEE summer seminars and other events. His latest book is\u00a0Bit by Bit: How P2P Is Freeing the World<\/em><\/a>. \u00a0Follow<\/a>\u00a0on Twitter and\u00a0Like<\/a>\u00a0on Facebook. Email<\/a>.\u00a0Tweets by @jeffreyatucker<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Jeffrey Tucker ****************************** A spectacular column in The New York Times by novelist Lionel Shriver makes the point. The new literary and academic establishment in the humanities has become so illiberal, particularly in its preposterous condemnation of \u201ccultural appropriation,\u201d that even the word liberal itself is falling out of fashion. It\u2019s so bad that Shriver was denounced and condemned for arguing that it is just fine for novelists to write characters into their work that are not of the same…<\/p>\n

Read More Read More<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[87,41],"tags":[4935,2113,4938,362,84,1910,523,4150,4936,894,2111,2112,30,4937],"class_list":["post-6609","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-culture","category-philosophy","tag-beyonce","tag-classical-liberal","tag-cultural-appropriation","tag-free-speech","tag-freedom","tag-jeffrey-a-tucker","tag-jeffrey-tucker","tag-left","tag-lemonade","tag-leonard-read","tag-liberal","tag-liberalism","tag-libertarian","tag-lionel-shriver"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6609","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6609"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6609\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6611,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6609\/revisions\/6611"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6609"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6609"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6609"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}