13 votes

Liberals Against Liberty

"There is a disturbing trend going on in America today. You can see it on TV, you read it in the papers, you can hear it on the radio, and you can sense it in the things people say. That trend is called statism, or the belief that government action can solve any and all problems the country may face, even those concerning social justice. This “statism” is camouflaged with the term “liberal,” which, as I will prove, is the definition of irony.
Modern “liberals” (which I will refer to henceforth as “statists”) are often guilty of one key logical fallacy- that personal freedom and economic freedom are separable. The line of thinking follows that one can give up some or all of their economic freedoms in the forms of taxes, government control of our money, and regulations on businesses and consumers alike. The result, statists believe, is greater personal freedom that we all enjoy through a “level” playing field."

Read the rest at:

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Awesome, guys. I appreciate

Awesome, guys. I appreciate the comments and criticism. I understand I get a little unfocused and scatterbrained at points; I guess it's because I have so much to say and I wind up going off-topic because of that. I'm still trying to figure out the balance between depth of discussion and keeping the article at a manageable length.

I've already learned so much just from the few comments you all left. About the "classical" liberal point: I attempted to include the point that what used to be a liberal is now known as a libertarian, but I guess I felt it started taking me in yet another direction so I cut it. When I used the term "liberal," I simply wished to use the term and definition as most people hear it on TV, etc.

As far as the slavery part is concerned, yes I admit it does come off a bit strong :( You made the point "Above all, it is our responsibility to take control of our labor and direct it toward worthy ends. We can not rely on government to do that for us, nor can it stop us from doing it." That was actually what I was trying to get at, but you worded it so much more eloquently and accurately than I could. For that, I thank you.

Looks like I've got some editing to do!

Thanks again, everyone.

Simple Facts and Plain Arguments
A common sense take on politics and current events.


I really liked the article.

I agree with the below sentiment regarding "that's why slaves are slaves", because the grounds don't support the claim well. Also, equating "liberals" to "statists" is partially inaccurate because it does not account for "classical liberals" who share many libertarian small government pro civil liberties views with us. "Progressives" more accurately decribes the type of statist the author was trying to portray in my view, (Progressives for Paul might disagree though, but again, I think they/he (P4P that post here occasionally) are more classical liberal than progressive anyways. Would love to read his take.)

So, Great article! Many great points. I would share it with my liberal co-workers, except that the "that's why slaves are slaves" line is too over the top and would offend their liberal sensibilities. To the author, pls except this as constructive criticism, and consider an edit that might more clearly articulate your point in that sentance. Use logic, make your claim, and then provide grounds that support your claim in that sentence. You do a very great job of this all throughout the rest of your article. Thanks for sharring:)

Yes, good point

It should say "progressive liberals". Unfortunately today the word "liberal" is so commonly used to mean "progressives", that even I bitch about liberals all the time, although I consider myself a classical liberal. We gotta train ourselves to use the word "progressives"

"Social liberals" is the term

"Social liberal" is the term used to differentiate them from classical liberals. Not social as in social issues, social as in socialism. It was meant originally to be a center-left ideology more palatable for the middle classes than traditional leftism.

Progressives, by the American definition, tend to be to the left of the social liberals. The Green Party is very progressive, as are Representatives Kucinich and Grijalva. It is similar to Canadian, Australian and European social democracy (NDP, Labour Parties, etc). Both have heavy working-class backing.

Support Rand, Amash & other liberty candidates? Check out: http://www.LibertyConservatives.com/


for the info

The big issue is...

The article says that liberals think that personal and economic freedom are different. Not true - they actually don't believe in either.

Modern day liberals are very pro-govt bans on sugar, coke, they want mandatory bike helmets, removal of fire-extinguishers from buildings and so forth.

I Like It

Farmer makes a good point but otherwise it is an easy to understand explanation as to why liberals are enemies of freedom.

You want a comment?

OK. I like your article. Thank you for taking the time to write it.

About midway through it gets a little unfocused. The sentence

"Historically, the right to vote and have a say in government was restricted to those who owned property; that’s why slaves are slaves."

doesn't do much for me. Connecting voting to slavery? I think slavery is more aptly connected with the refusal to have labor extracted. Here are a couple related quotes for you to think about:

"100,000 Englishmen simply cannot control 350 million Indians, if those Indians refuse to cooperate." ---Ghandi

"Slavery was not eliminated in America or Europe, slavery can only be eliminated in the mind of the slave and in the mind of the master. Those are its strongholds."

Slavery is an exceedingly important matter to understand and on which not to get confused or confuse others. Above all, it is our responsibility to take control of our labor and direct it toward worthy ends. We can not rely on government to do that for us, nor can it stop us from doing it.

you are starting a conversation

more than worthy of its own thread.

"The two weakest arguments for any issue on the House floor are moral and constitutional"
Ron Paul

bump any comments?


any comments?

Simple Facts and Plain Arguments
A common sense take on politics and current events.