Reclaiming liberalism

By Alex Singleton | 31 January 2005

Prominent American Prospect journo Matt Yglesias thinks that referring to the Cato Institute as a "leading liberal think tank" is an "um, interesting description of Cato".

Why? In Washington DC, Cato is one of the the most liberal think tanks - and certainly the most prominent. But few Americans would describe Cato as "liberal". The word has been warped into a term of abuse, a way of attacking the left. Hence Republicans denounced John Kerry in the 2004 election as the most liberal member of the Senate.

Liberal is also a term of abuse in Europe, too, as The Economist has pointed out:

Rather than being keen on taxes and public spending, European liberals are often derided (notably in France) for seeking minimal government - in fact, for denying that government has any useful role at all, aside from pruning vital regulation and subverting the norms of decency that impede the poor from being ground down. Thus, in continental Europe, as in the United States, liberalism is also regarded as a perversion, a pathology: there is consistency in that respect, even though the sickness takes such different forms.

So who are using the term correctly: the Europeans or the Americans? I'm with the Europeans on this one. Don't get me a wrong: I'm not a fuddy-duddy who worries about Americanization. But calling American statists "liberals" is really inappropriate. "Liberal" makes you think of liberty, freedom, the individual: not state control of economics.

The Economist says it is time to reclaim the word, and to use other words as general insults:

For the use of the right, we therefore recommend the following insults: leftist, statist, collectivist, socialist. For the use of the left: conservative, neoconservative, far-right extremist and apologist for capitalism. That will free "liberal" to be used exclusively from now on in its proper sense, as we shall continue to use it regardless.

Quite right.