draft of essay

Hippy, flip-flopper, and sissy, that is what people think when they think of liberals. Feminist, pothead, and pink coat commie, many of the liberals hear these words today. Though what is a liberal today? Could it be a hippy, pink coat commie, who smokes pot all day, or is it something else, someone who supports government who protects their rights? Is it someone who believes that this year could be the year a black President is elected, or a female President? I believe that the word “liberal”, in its political meaning, should mean those who advocate the protection of the individual and the promotion of one’s own welfare by the government.

Started in the time of Latin, liberal has had a great change throughout the years. Latin’s “liberalis” meaning “of or relating to freedom” or “munificus” meaning generous. The word evolved later on to mean “suitable for a gentlemen”, meaning that it was the way to think. Liberal became a word to describe those who think differently from the normal way of thinking. Liberals were the ones who were against slavery when it was present. The modern liberal word was formed in the early 1930’s when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed into law the New Deal, helping the poor of the nation, and forever embodied the word that would be seen as derogatory just forty years later. In the 1970’s, liberal was known to be the person who did not support the war in Vietnam, and therefore was known for what it was in the day, hippy. The word “liberal” has gone on to mean someone who seeks to have the government protect their rights.

Liberal to me is an ideal in which those who think liberally want the government to look out for its citizens. This is based off most of the ideals of the Democratic party of the United States. Liberal should be someone who wants social programs. Social programs are those that help the misfortunate in society, such as Social Security and Medicaid. Liberals would want these social programs because they seek the protection from the government. Social programs protect the individual and seek to promote their welfare. Liberals are those that should be also known to seek the protection of the personal rights by the government. Liberals should be those which advocate the protection of the Bill of Rights, which protects personal rights. The liberals of the world should be known for the protection of the personal rights and promotion of the welfare of the nation.

Many of the liberals in the world are seen in different lights, with different values, causing problems in the definition which I have formulated. For example, in South Africa, in the 1960’s, the Communist party was referred to as “liberals.” So politically, “liberal” has been referred to as the far left majority party in the nation. As in ours, the Democrats are the “liberals” simply because they are the far left on the spectrum. The farthest left on the spectrum are the anarchists, simply because they do not want government to be there. Next comes the communists, which supports multiple the promotion of the welfare of the nation, but in a more radical way with less respect to the personal rights of the individual. This is the reason why communism, though so closely related to liberalism, cannot be considered liberal anymore, simply because there is no regard to the personal rights of the individual. Though there will be disagreements, they will be shut down.

Liberal is a word, like most words, that have evolved over time. This has been true throughout the latter part of the last century, and being political, it is an ever evolving word. Some who read this would state that changing a political definition would create a divide in those who already call themselves “liberal.” Those who consider themselves liberal would be inclined to choose between my new “neo-modern liberalism” or something else. The definition would create a firm boundary on those who are calling themselves liberal, which, admittedly, would create a gap in who would further call themselves liberal. Though it would not create a grand gap. For example, those in our nation who are considered liberal, ie the Democrats, are thought to be so because they want to help the poor. The two remaining Democratic Candidates for the nomintion to the Presidency of the United States are standing firm on their belief that we as a nation should help the poor, through social programs. Liberals these days are also known as the ones who support the efforts of the American Civil Liberties Union, who seek to protect the personal rights of the individuals of our nation. Therefore, that rift should not be too grand.

The second argument or problem one might have with my “neo-modern liberalism” is that some people would try to call it the next facist movement or the next enemy of democracy. I would like to state that no, it is not a rejection of democracy, it is merely a method in which democracy should orient their ideals. I do not believe in the superiority of one race, nor is the economy in a position where a dictator would be elected by the great people of this nation. The name is simply extended to reflect the times, where everything must be politically correct. The definition presented is in no way shape or form one that fails to respect the ideals of the American way of life.

Neo- modern liberalism is the next new political term. Meaning “one who seeks government protection of personal rights and promotion of the welfare of the people of the nation,” is something that will seek to redefine American politics as we know it. The new term will further distance itself from communism, and seek to create a more solid idea of liberal. No longer will the great people of the nation wonder what it really is to be a liberal, but know exactly what that person stands for who calls themselves such. A liberal, will now have a distinct identity, not being hippies

word!

My eyes were opened due to the discussion about rhetoric vs. epistemology, which is essentially the battle between the actual definition and the supposed definition. This got me thinking how we use words, and sometimes perhaps do not know the definitions, or the history, and while the latter is our latest essay assignment, I was just thinking some words that are frequently used when they should not be.

The first of these words is “gay.” Everyone, myself included, states that certain things that are conforming to our ideas, or hopes, are determined to be “gay.” Not homosexual, as we do not mean it in that way, it means that it conflicts with our ideas, whether it be something as trivial as an elevator not working, or our favorite restaurant not being open at three in the morning when we are trying to pull an all- nighter.

We also discussed the differences in macho between America and Mexico. The Mexicans, and representative of the rest of Latin America, macho is a man who take responsibility for a family, and taking care of the daily tasks. The American version is someone who can take on a million enemies and then go home at night, and seem like nothing happened. This difference in different peoples’ views is also reflected in the idea of what different governments’ labels mean. For example, in the United States, we have a federal republic and we have participation throughout the nation. It is a democratic form of government. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, both of the former names indicate a participatory government with fair laws, however, the nation is a military dictatorship, which does not allow for participatory elections. The nation is known as a democratic republic, but they have a different view from us on what democracy is.

Words are used out of context in the oral language everyday, allowing for confusion, and evolution of the words. “Gay” is used to describe the things that annoy someone, and democracy is relevant to the nation. It essentially breaks down to this, words are not held to the modern dictionary’s definitions, and therefore evolve definitions over time.