I Used To Be A Liberal

At heart, I probably still am.

I used to be a liberal. At heart, I probably still am.

Actually, I used to be a libertarian. In high school. I’m convinced every young white guy in America goes through a libertarian phase. Living in a country whose systems and structures were put in place by people like you, for people like you, is tantamount to being born on second base and thinking you hit a double. Well, I’m too honest to claim I hit a double I did not, and the fact that women don’t like libertarianism proves an impediment to reaching the other metaphorical second base. It should cause concern when such a large portion of the population finds your worldview selfish and abhorrent out of hand.

I used to be a liberal. At heart, I probably still am.

I was taught growing up in school that liberalism grew out of Enlightenment ideals like the rejection of absolute monarchy, protection of individual rights, and government by representatives committed to debate on their constituents’ behalf. Liberal democracy, with its separation of powers, staggered elections, and majority rule with protection for minority rights, was first implemented by the Founding Fathers of this country. THE US CONSITUTION IS THE DOCUMENT THAT CODIFIED LIBERALISM. Both nominal liberals and conservatives have operated within this paradigm. Capitalism grew side by with liberalism. They’re inherently intertwined. But they’re not the same. Liberal democracy is a system of governance; capitalism is a system of economics.

I used to be a liberal. At heart, I probably still am.

In the years after World War II, we saw the New Deal consensus deliver broad-based economic growth, strengthening the middle class to include 65 percent of the population, and create public health insurance programs for the elderly and poor. The Supreme Court, helmed by Chief Justice Earl Warren, expanding civil rights and civil liberties, expanding the promise of the country’s founding to all Americans. Because liberal democracy checked capitalism’s excesses, was flexible enough to incorporate a little socialism, the fruits of liberalism were made more widely available.

I used to be a liberal. At heart, I probably still am.

But liberalism changed. The ideas of Austrian economists Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek, championed in the United States by Frank Knight, Milton Friedman, James Buchanan (not that one - this one) and the “Chicago School” slowly gained acceptance. Neoliberalism, the name for their philosophy, held that sustained economic growth, and thus human progress, is best achieved by privatizing the public sector, deregulating business, and minimizing taxes. Essentially, neoliberalism is a hostile corporate takeover of government by capital. Capitalism itself becomes the system of government. Throughout the 1970’s, corporations and extremely wealthy individuals began pouring large amounts of money into think tanks and foundations whose purpose was to legitimize this once-fringe theory. The Democratic administration of Jimmy Carter dabbled in the stuff, but the ascendance of Republican Ronald Reagan in 1981 put neoliberalism into overdrive.

I used to be a liberal. At heart, I probably still am.

But my entire childhood was marked by the dismemberment of the New Deal order that had brought such wide prosperity. By raising the federal prime interest rate higher than it had ever been, drastically cutting the top tax rate on the richest Americans, gutting regulations on industries throughout the economy, crushing trade unions, and cutting spending on human services like Social Security, TRILLIONS of dollars were transferred from the middle class to the top 1%. In 1980, the collective middle class held about 60% of the nation’s wealth. By 1992, that number was 50%. With the assistance of the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, the rich essentially picked the pocket of the middle class.

I used to be a liberal. At heart, I probably still am.

But a generation of Democrats, tired of losing at the presidential level, embraced neoliberal economics. The Clinton administration, already committed to unregulated markets and low taxes, worked across the aisle with Republicans to destroy the welfare system upon which many needy families relied. Clinton signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which wound up costing the US nearly 700,000 jobs between 1994 and 2010, almost 80% of those manufacturing jobs. In 1999, Clinton repealed the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, further deregulating the banking industry and allowing commercial banks to gamble in the stock market. This would lead directly to the financial collapse of 2008. The former Arkansas governor was also little better on social issues, championing the 1994 crime bill that opened up a new era of mass incarceration and greatly expanded the death penalty, and caved to Republicans on the homophobic Defense of Marriage Act. Capital had consumed the Democratic Party in near totality, the market leaving little room for a conscience. Liberalism had been swallowed by neoliberalism.

I used to be a liberal. At heart, I probably still am.

But economically, the parties were now essentially the same. Neoconservative Republicans differentiated themselves from neoliberal Democrats in international affairs, pursuing an aggressive foreign policy with a large military budget. They’re okay with exorbitant spending for this purpose only. And law enforcement. And incarceration. And surveillance. So, in the wake of the terrorist attacks of 9/11, when the George W. Bush administration was attempting to lie the country into an unnecessary war that would bring to tragic ends hundreds of thousands of human lives (pro-life my ass) the Democrats had a chance to stand up and say NO. Some did. But 39% of House Dems voted for war and an infuriating 58% of Senate Dems did the same. Evan Bayh, you’re not forgiven. Neoliberalism demands war. It’s good for markets, after all. And I wondered if one could even be a liberal, without being a neoliberal. Could they be disentangled? Could we keep the liberalism, but lose the Neo?

Keanu Reeves as Neo in 1999’s The Matrix

I used to be a liberal. At heart, I probably still am.

But as the Bush administration ended in disaster, bogged down by war and the economy in ruins, it was apparent that capitalism’s excesses and need for growth at any cost had led to this disaster. In young, charismatic Barack Obama, we had a champion who would reject neoliberal hegemony and restore the people’s elected government to its rightful place superior to and separate from capital. To use capitalism to serve the populace instead of the reverse. So much hope for change. Right? Nope! First, there was the Wall Street bailout. While the stated purpose was pump money into these big banks to stimulate lending, a lack of imposed conditions allowed them to hoard funds. They covered their own mistakes, but didn’t help homeowners. Then, Obama spent much of his political capital pushing the Affordable Care Act through Congress. While the ACA did reduce the number of Americans without health insurance, it was largely a gift to the largest insurance companies. We should have had a nationalized healthcare system like LITERALLY EVERY OTHER INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRY ON THE PLANET, but neoliberal capture of government wouldn’t allow it. And internationally, despite the Nobel Peace Prize, Obama behaved like a neoconservative, engaging in extralegal drone warfare and regime change just like his predecessor. After so much promise, the Obama administration left a bitter taste. Was liberalism dead? Did capitalism kill it? What is the alternative?

I used to be a liberal. At heart, I probably still am.

Liberalism and Neoliberalism used to be two different things: the first, a system of governing and the latter an economic system. The similar names, along with the apparent merger of the two, have led to a troubling development. Large swaths of the Republican electorate, disillusioned by the results of neoliberalism and perhaps not knowing the difference, have rejected liberal democracy itself. Their embrace of authoritarianism in the form of Donald Trump threatens the entire American Constitutional system. The neofascist MAGA movement would keep the “neo” - the unregulated capitalism - and lose the liberalism. Representative democracy would be replaced with Christian theocracy.

I used to be a liberal. At heart, I probably still am.

But I’m not a neoliberal. And Democrats better jettison neoliberal ideas before it is too late. I am deeply concerned that they just don’t get it. Neoliberalism failed. It collapsed in 2008 and has been held together with twine, duct tape, and chewing gum for the past fifteen years. MAGA Republicans have begun to reject it and offer alternatives - authoritarian, theocratic, violent alternatives. Neoliberal Republicans like Michael Steele, Steve Schmidt, and Liz Cheney, abandoned by these extremists in their party are finding purchase in establishment Democratic circles. While I salute their rejection of neofascism, Dems should not welcome them under their big tent. Frankly, the tent is too big already and neoliberalism is the face-eating tiger in the ring. It’s time to put and end to this circus.

I used to be a liberal. At heart, I probably still am.

I believe in the core tenets of liberal democracy. I believe in voting. I believe in separation of powers. I believe in achieving consensus through lively debate. I believe in majority rule with protections for minority rights. And I believe government has the obligation, through “Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to … provide for the common Defense and general Welfare” of its people. That is, I believe it is government’s obligation to see that the economy serves the populace, not the other way around. And I believe capitalism, left unchecked, will destroy liberalism.

I used to be a liberal. At heart, I probably still am.

But we’ve got a problem, in the form of climate change, that poses an existential threat to the planet and every human on it. And I think there are only two ways it can turn out. Capitalism will abandon liberalism for fascism. It has in the past and will again. It is the nature of the beast. Private property, that is wealth, seeks protection from popular democracy. A strongman leader will do just that, protecting the already wealthy and powerful while the rest suffer. If the worldwide economy continues unchecked by governments, the planet will continue to burn, arable land and fresh water will be scarce, and the planet’s inhabitants will war over resources in a Mad Max-style dystopia while the ultra-rich hide out in their fully-stocked bunkers. If we want to avoid this scenario, the world’s governments MUST arrive at a system of just and equitable distribution. We must produce goods and services for need, rather than profit. And if it sounds like I just described socialism, that’s because I did.

I used to be a liberal. At heart, I probably still am.

But I’m not a communist. I do not want a top-down, unelected, authoritarian system. Like I said, I believe in democracy. And I believe most people are good, decent human beings who believe all the citizens of the world deserve life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, even the ones in “shithole countries”. I believe the industrialized world can open their borders and rescue the people of Global South from a climate apocalypse. We owe it to them for hundreds of years of colonialist exploitation. Liberal democracy must abandon neoliberal capitalism and evolve into social democracy if we, the people of Earth want any say in how humanity survives this epic struggle. If it does not, I’m afraid for the future of civilization itself. And if we find ourselves that deep in crisis, and fascism or communism are the only two choices, well, I guess you can call me “Comrade”.

I used to be a liberal. At heart, I probably still am. But the time for evolution is now. Before it is too late.