3 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Liberals? Conservatives? What about socialists and 'progressives'?

Reader comment on item: Why Do You American Conservatives Keep Losing?

Submitted by Daniel Bamford (United Kingdom), Oct 18, 2018 at 12:57

An interesting article, [though I disagree with] applying skewed contemporary American political categories to Europe from the 17th century (!) onwards.

This results in [a] confusion of political terms in the conclusion:

"Conservatives are unlikely to replicate the Hungarian success in countries lacking a living memory of Soviet-like experience. The lessons of liberalism's failures must painfully be learned anew by each generation."

So, does that make the Soviet Union a failed 'liberal' regime...?!

The whole political culture of the USA is basically liberal and the 17th century liberals referred to with such scorn in this article include people like John Locke, who wrote the constitution of Pennsylvania and therefore influenced the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution.

The whole political culture of Europe is basically socialist and has been since at least the First World War (but earlier in Germany).

The definition of 'liberal' here is really a definition of 'progressive'.

Yes, it is possible for liberals to be 'progressive', but liberals can also be conservative. In fact, many liberals have realised that liberal politics relies on conservative social values.

Many notable liberals have been deeply religious: e.g. British PM William Gladstone and his historian friend Lord (John) Acton and if we're going back to the 17th century then what about Oliver Cromwell and John Milton?! Or in Hungary we should mention Count Istvan Szechenyi. Even liberal atheists have realise the importance of religious tradition e.g. Friedrich Hayek and Isaiah Berlin.

However, whereas liberals may be either 'progressive' or conservative, this choice is not available to socialists, who _must_ be 'progressive', because socialism is based on the humanist delusion of human progress.

The one book that really helped me straighten out the true meaning of different political terms was Roger Scruton's 'A Dictionary of Political Thought' (1982). Just for the record, Scruton has long identified himself as a _conservative_ philosopher.

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Liberals? Conservatives? What about socialists and 'progressives'? by Daniel Bamford

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)