|
If
supporting all of those ideas makes me a "liberal," so be it; I wear
the label proudly.
Was
not this country founded on the liberal concepts that all are created equal and
endowed with the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Has not
every major social leap forward come about because of the pursuit of those liberal
ideals? So when did being a "liberal" become a bad thing? In
the six definition entries I found for the word liberal on Dictionary.com the
term "generous" is used seven times. This gets to the very heart of
the difference between liberals and conservatives, who use the word "liberal"
with such disdain. In my book, the worst thing you can say about a person is that
they are "selfish," but it usually fits conservatives; why would they
have had to invent the term "compassionate conservative" if not to try
and debunk the notion that Republicans traditionally had been the, "I got
mine, screw everybody else" Party. Teddy Roosevelt was the last progressive-minded
Republican I can name, but his administration set the stage for America's empire
as it stands today. The
conservative view of the world is, "Life is unfair, but so what; it's always
been that way, so get over it." Meanwhile, pretty much all liberals I know
look at the world and say, "Life has been unfair and let's try to do something
about that." Conservatives view the world as a zero-sum game with only winners
and losers while I, as a liberal, embrace an abundance mentality that suggests
everybody can win and there is more than enough to go around. It
was suggested to me recently, by a conservative, that "liberal" started
to become something negative in the 1960s and '70s when liberals lost their moral
compass and began to back issues like gay rights, legalizing marijuana and abortion.
I also have heard it suggested that George McGovern was the first presidential
candidate to be stained by the derisive use of the term "liberal," a
tactic the Republicans used with success against Michael Dukakis and hope to use
in kind against Sen. John Kerry. While
I admit I have some personal problems with certain aspects of controversial liberal
issues, the very fact that I am willing to discuss them in a rational manner and
listen to other points of view makes me a liberal. It also seems to make me an
embracer of sin and everything that is unholy in the eyes of the conservative
"Christian" right. This
does not really bother me because I would rather be a bona-fide liberal than a
"Christian" in name only and I would rather go to a "hell"
with people like Gandhi and El Hajj Malik El Shabazz (Malcolm X) then go to a
"heaven" with the likes of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell. I
hold nothing against sincere, generous and peaceful followers of any faith who
embrace the ideas of religious tolerance. What I am against is conservatism and
fundamentalism in any faith that breeds intolerance. In the Muslim world we see
it in the extremist terrorists we are fighting while in America we see it in "White
Power" hate groups that spawned the likes of Timothy McVeigh. It begs the
question, "Who are the so-called 'Christian/conservatives' in this country
closer to?" I
believe that if you convince yourself that you are destined for "heaven"
then you, on some level, absolve yourself of responsibility to act rationally
here on Earth and you are in fact convinced that you know what is in the mind
of God. This is the mindset that leads to suicide bombers! However, since I do
not believe that it is possible for man to know what is in the mind of God, I
think many so-called "Christians/conservatives" will have a rude awakening
on Judgment Day. In
my opinion, our highest priority should be to improve life for all living things
on this planet, not to enrich our own lives at the expense of the natural world
and those less fortunate. And I'm not saying anything here that preachers haven't
been railing about from the pulpit for centuries; it's called hypocrisy, and it
knows no bounds. In
my life, I have seen many so-called "Christians" who actually worship
the gods of money and power and I have met so-called "conservatives"
who smoke grass, but support the neo-conservative agenda because of support for
Israel or the notion that Sept. 11 must be avenged, and attacking Iraq was the
right thing to do. I also have known of so-called "Christians" who engage
in "adultery and fornication," but preach against it. The personal behavior
of this generation of the Bush family is a good example, from Neil to the Bush
daughters. This,
in short, is what bothers me the most about George W. Bush and his neo-conservative
regime. Inside, I believe he is still the privileged frat boy riding on the coattails,
or shoulders, of others and not understanding why the ideological interests they
pursue are wrong. Only these days instead of doing drugs or drinking to excess,
he is high on oil wealth and intoxicated by almost unchecked power. Dubya
therefore has become the definition of the 21st century: "I'm more patriotic
than you because I have more American flags (made in China) on my sport utility
vehicle." He is a Christian/consumerist/capitalist who believes he is destined
to have material wealth in this lifetime, glorified bodies in the hereafter and
that God will bless America exclusively and above all others so we can do no wrong.
| 
advertisement
