Writing the previous post, I found myself thinking about the difference between “left” and “liberal.” By a happy coincidence, there’s a brilliant post at MaxSpeak about the difference in economic policy between being liberal and being left. Here’s just a sample, but you should go read the whole thing:
By contrast, the leftist elevates labor to a central place in social transformation and wrestles with fundamental sources of inequality rooted in race and gender. Obviously, important problems remain to be solved. The left chooses to be preoccupied with such problems. The liberal is more resigned to the status quo, mostly I would say out of a sense of pragmatism and pessimism, not bad faith. […]
When it comes to inequality, liberals tend to oversell equality of opportunity, in two respects. First, they tend to overestimate the extent to which better education actually expands opportunity. This question lends itself to empirical study. There is no question that anyone is better off with more rather than less education, and nobody left of center would be against more resources for education. But there is at least some evidence that more education does not close gaps by race or gender. The second respect is that money that improves schools is inadequate, in light of disadvantages outside of school that widen inequality of opportunity. There is evidence for this as well.
By contrast, the left views poverty and inequality as more a question of power. One person’s want is another’s advantage. There was a great program along these lines on public TV some years ago. Unionization is not seen as social policy by liberals, but as the study linked to earlier today shows, market wages for full-time work leaves many poor. Unionization is an anti-poverty program.
The left is criticized for favoring “equality of result” rather than opportunity. The implication is that those so favored are undeserving, unqualified. This assumption is used to prove itself, in rebuttal to actual demographic data on qualifications. A fair selection process for jobs or other opportunities would roughly conform to demographics (including factors going to qualifications, such as education). When results are observed that diverge radically from what we could expect, there is a case for government intervention. Fairness or its lack derives from where the power to control selection is.
Again, I recommend reading the whole thing..
I’ve been trying to explain these sorts of distinctions to people of late. But here in Idaho, I don’t quibble when I meet a liberal. Close enough.
There is a Political Spectrum and 34 Political Terms and definitions and much Liberal information at the following web site:
http://www.TheMillerMelkoandMarshallFamily@groups.msn.com
This Political Spectrum has ascending/descending colors from the Color Red which is the FAR RIGHT.
Pingback: Crooked Timber