How to Tell if You Are a Liberal

Lee Siegal in his mini book, Harvard Is Burning, blasts what he calls “elite liberals”. He is a New York writer writing in many periodicals who penned this very short book which is a bit funny but sheds little light on the subject. It is a bit like thumbing your nose at your parents.

Siegal presents his liberal beliefs with this list of beliefs: as believing in a single -payer health care system, redistribution of wealth via a more equitable tax code, a significant raise in minimum wage, expanding entitlements for the poor, sick, and elderly, against capital punishment and privatizing education, for gay marriage, basic rights for illegal aliens, and gun control.

So now you have a list which is better than his book. If you agree with those principles you are a liberal, even if you think otherwise.

An Athenian Fear of Oligarchy

Marilyn Wedge, PhD in Psychology Today writes about how the Athenians feared that their democracy would turn into oligarchy. They drew lots for government officials, we vote.

This is still an important fear for those who those who support democracy in our country. Plato describes their fears well in The Republic. Plato believed oligarchy was government by “greedy men” who love money and are reluctant to pay taxes for the common good. Plato bends the word oligarchy (government by the few) a bit to government by the few wealthy.

The greedy oligarchs believe they are their fellow rich should be given wealth  into their hands while the rest of society is reduced to poverty. Bill Moyers recently noted this similarity to the Athenians when referring to the recent Supreme Court decision that changed the law of the land to make corporations persons which in turn gives them more say that others in the electoral process; or better, a louder voice via media ad purchases.

Athenians saw the dangers of democracy polarizing their country and we certainly see that in evidence today. Again, as Plato puts it, “hate and power plot against one another” or oligarchy by nature is a breeding ground for class warfare.

Plato goes on to speak of the moral cost of oligarchy, “he is not really one person, but in some way a double man” or oligarchs try to appear respectable but are not really virtuous. Oligarchs lose the ability to have genuine concern of the well beings of persons and society.

In my opinion the Athenians have much to teach us as I fear we have already become an oligarchy and need to find a way back to democracy.

Wealthy Pessimists

Thomas B. Edsall writing in the NY Times about a Northwestern University economists research paper that looks at the future trends from an economic perspective (via Bill Moyer’s blog.)  Robert Gordon who wrote this paper talks of 3 industrial revolutions: steam and railroads (1750-1830); electricity (1870-1900) and computers (1960 to the present). He does not see a fourth.

All of this has to do with the economic imbalance of money in our society. Edsall believes that the wealthy are very pessimistic about the future and are working hard just to protect the wealth.

He says: “Affluent Republicans – the donor and policy base of the conservative movement — are on red alert. They want to protect and enhance their position in a future of diminished resources. What really provokes the ferocity with which the right currently fights for regressive tax and spending policies is a deeply pessimistic vision premised on a future of hard times. This vision has prompted the Republican Party to adopt a preemptive strategy that anticipates the end of growth and the onset of sustained austerity – a strategy to make sure that the size of their slice of the pie doesn’t get smaller as the pie shrinks.

It is an interesting premise that explains why the wealthy are so resistant to building up the middle class and creating real economic growth ~ as seen in the positions of Romney and Obama.

Now contrast this to a video on YouTube video by Nick Hanauer, a capitalist who understands that only consumers create jobs rather than capitalists. His video is well worth watching and stands in sharp opposition to the views of the affluent Republicans Edsalls mentions. Please take a look. http://youtu.be/bBx2Y5HhplI

Here’s to optimism over pessimism. In my view it is more realistic and pragmatic.

Thank Liberals For Saving American

Reflection and more on Alan Colmes book of How Liberals Saved America. Colmes is a Fox News radio host, go figure. He is known for his wit and human and his intellect and he works for FOX news; it fairly boggles the mind. Some thoughts that come forward include the following.

America was founded on a liberal idea – a representative democracy without a state religion. That makes it left of England where the Church of England dictated laws and mores. Freedom of religion was created here to get rid of the oppression of religion.

There are no religious tests to hold office – liberal.

The commander and chief of the army is a civilian – liberal.

Taxation shall have representation – liberal.

A three part government for checks and balances – liberal.

The constitution is based upon English Law dating back to the Magna Carta (1215) not the bible – liberal.

Common law comes from the people night a “higher authority” – liberal.

No titles of nobility, or centralized power vested in one person – liberal.

The Declaration of Independence stated legal and natural rights – liberal.

All people are equal – liberal.

And the list goes on today liberal ideas of social security, Medicare, assistance to the elderly, government safety nets, governmental roles in regulating economic fluctuations, etc.

This is the heritage of liberal thinking and liberals continue to lead the way for the common good and sharing our nations prosperity among all our people.

Colmes shows in his book how liberals define our nation and move it forward. He promotes the idea that we must continue to become ever more liberal, progressive, for us to remain the beacon of freedom and democracy for the world.

For those who are old enough you will recognize the liberal ideas were not solely embodied in the Democratic Party but was also historically integral in the Republican party. Lincoln was a liberal. Look at the medical proposals of Richard Nixon, among many Republican leaders prior to the Reagan era which were more liberal than Obamacare. Liberality, which the extreme right today often uses as a dirty word today, extends beyond party belief. It stands at the foundation of our democracy and continues in programs and legislation that reflect care for all Americans today.

Separation of Church and State

One of the fundamental and important principles of our country’s founders was the separation of church and state. That stance has been largely accepted and followed throughout most of our history and is wise. Unfortunately such is no longer the case.

We can see the beginning of that change in the election campaign of Ronal Reagan who found willing political allies among the religious right, the more extreme religious right and made use of them.

In the many years I served as a pastor I always encouraged members of my congregations to be politically active as members of this country. I also encouraged them to use their religious values in determining who they voted for. These were privileges, rights and obligations they had both as Christians and as citizens. With that said, I never ever once said who they should vote for in a sermon or in my role as pastor. I looked upon that as an absolute abuse of a sacred office and unethical for a pastor to do. I still believe that. It is one of joys I have as a retired pastor is that I no longer have to worry about the public role I had as a working pastor and now have the freedom to express my political views along with my religious views; thus the reason for this blog.

I wish my brothers and sisters of the cloth on the religious right had a similar stance. I find their use of the pulpit as a bully pulpit for a particular candidate repugnant, unethical, and an abuse of their office and often reflecting incredibly poor biblical understanding.

In the years since Reagan we have seen more and more of the religious right pursuing this unethical behavior in their pulpits. The Republicans have accepted and embraced this support to their shame as it stands counter the constitution and reflects a mix of religion and politics that was honored by politicians of character.

The type of pandering to these vested interests by political candidates (Rick Santorum is an example of one of the worst of these) I find revolting. There have been great leaders such as President Kennedy and others when pressed responded with integrity to both their religious beliefs and the political beliefs while affirming the belief in the separation of church and state.

The presidency has been used and used properly as a bully pulpit for national issues by many presidents and they used their office to push forward ideas and legislation that would benefit the nation and educated the nation; Teddy Roosevelt was a master of this and as a result we have the many protected national parks we have today for all to enjoy.

I repeat again that I find it incongruent and morally wrong for folk attempting to push the religious values upon others in national law when those issues clearly belong to the church. It is counter the teachings of both parties but the conservatives have shown over and over again this inconsistency in their political platforms and stances. If you cannot see the difference between protecting individual freedom and the inflicting of moral practices upon others you reflect muddy logic and inconsistent beliefs, and reflect badly upon both your religion and our civic duty.

Romney’s 12 Million Jobs Claim

Pretty bold claim huh? Only two presidents have seen more than 12 million jobs created during their administrations – Reagan and Clinton.

Romney says he would create 500,000 a month, however, he would only need half that, 250,000, to reach his claim. We currently add about 150,000 a month.

If we avoid a recession if the year-end budget is not reached, the Congregational Budget Office believes that 9.6 million jobs will be created in the next 4 years, not matter who is president. Moody’s analytics predicts 12 million as well as others.

So my guess is that we Romney’s prediction is most likely to come true, especially if he does not become president and institute even worse trickle down economics.

Extreme Positions ~ for example health care

It always amuses me to see all the political ads the proclaim the extreme positions of “Liberals” when they are the ones that really promote the more extreme positions.

In particular in our state Tammy Baldwin is attacked as nearly demonic in her extreme, radical support of national health care. The question is extreme by whose criteria?

Here is a list of countries with forms of universal health care:

Country	Start Date of Universal Health Care	System Type
Click links for more source material on each country’s health care system.
Norway	1912	Single Payer
New Zealand	1938	Two Tier
Japan	1938	Single Payer
Germany	1941	Insurance Mandate
Belgium	1945	Insurance Mandate
United Kingdom	1948	Single Payer
Kuwait	1950	Single Payer
Sweden	1955	Single Payer
Bahrain	1957	Single Payer
Brunei	1958	Single Payer
Canada	1966	Single Payer
Netherlands	1966	Two-Tier
Austria	1967	Insurance Mandate
United Arab Emirates	1971	Single Payer
Finland	1972	Single Payer
Slovenia	1972	Single Payer
Denmark	1973	Two-Tier
Luxembourg	1973	Insurance Mandate
France	1974	Two-Tier
Australia	1975	Two Tier
Ireland	1977	Two-Tier
Italy	1978	Single Payer
Portugal	1979	Single Payer
Cyprus	1980	Single Payer
Greece	1983	Insurance Mandate
Spain	1986	Single Payer
South Korea	1988	Insurance Mandate
Iceland	1990	Single Payer
Hong Kong	1993	Two-Tier
Singapore	1993	Two-Tier
Switzerland	1994	Insurance Mandate
Israel	1995	Two-Tier
United States	2014?	Insurance Mandate

Will the United States join this list in 2014?

[1] Roughly 15% of Americans lack insurance coverage, so the US clearly has not yet achieved universal health care. There is no universal definition of developed or industrialized nations. For this list, those countries with UN Human Development Index scores above 0.9 on a 0 to 1 scale are considered developed.

[2] The dates given are estimates, since universal health care arrived gradually in many countries. In Germany for instance, government insurance programs began in 1883, but did not reach universality until 1941. Typically the date provided is the date of passage or enactment for a national health care Act mandating insurance or establishing universal health insurance.

Are these countries all extreme? 32 of 33 developed nations. Not to have universal health care seems extreme in my humble opinion.

A couple of charts for those who like those.

Social health protection:^[9] Proportion of the population covered by law, latest available year (percentages)^[10]

  Less than 10%

  10-40%

  40-70%

  70-95%

  More than 95%

  No data

Or perhaps this from Wikipedia is more helpful.
The U.S. stands almost entirely alone among developed nations that lack universal health care.