Are We Really All Fascists And Socialists?
It is a lot easier to get me riled up today than when I was younger. Politics, bureaucracy, and yes, idiotic trends on TikTok (sitting quietly during a flight is heroic?!?) can cause the “angry old man” in me to rise up. My most frequent “trigger” of late is the constant bias and manipulation of language used by individuals and the media when discussing politics.
At times it feels like the political parties and their proxies are fighting a war to see who can misuse the terms “fascist,” “Marxist,” or some related term (i.e. communist, racist, socialist, etc.). As far as I know, there has not been a scientific study on the topic but if I were to judge the political breakdown of society based on the online commentary and discussions I’d be forced to conclude that 90% of citizens are either fascists or socialists. A quick Google search pulls up the following examples:
The Nation - Why Aren’t We Talking About Trump’s Fascism?
Politico – The right’s fascism problem
Fox Business - Kamala Harris is a 'socialist': Sen. Rick Scott
The Times of India - Is Kamala Harris a 'communist'? What Elon Musk said
Society has even begun to use the term “liberal” incorrectly, applying it exclusively to those on the political left. The abuse of the term is so bad that some on the political right now use it as a slur. The obvious problem with the misuse of these terms, aside from it being ignorant and/or dishonest, is that it prevents real dialogue and exaggerates the differences between the two sides. To understand the damage being done we first need to establish some basic meanings. Let’s start with the term “liberal.”
John Locke, an English philosopher, is often credited with defining liberalism, put very simply it posits that there is a social contract between the state and the individual guaranteeing “a natural right to life, liberty and property” which was later amended in the US Constitution to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Seems simple, eh? If only. The devil is in the details as they say and while “life” seems straightforward “liberty” and “the pursuit of happiness” are more complex.
Clearly, there are tradeoffs and rights that conflict with others - I may have a right to property but not if you already own it – and so, over time, liberalism has evolved to encompass more numerous principles than what Locke first laid out including private property, market economies, individual rights, liberal democracy, secularism, rule of law, economic and political freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion. It is today the dominant ideology of the modern West.
There’s a scene from Apocalypse Now in which the riverboat stops, and Chef goes ashore to collect some mangoes in the jungle. During his search, he comes face-to-face with a tiger, runs screaming back to the boat, and repeats over and over, “Never get out of the boat…never get out of the boat…I got to remember never get out of the boat.” Liberal democracy is our metaphorical boat, it is not perfect, but it has been responsible for improving the lives of everyone who has lived under it including increases in political stability, health indicators such as life expectancy and infant mortality, lower corruption, and better management of resources.
There are numerous means by which political scientists attempt to place people and political parties on a political spectrum, the one I’m partial to is the two-axis political compass consisting of a horizontal economic axis and a vertical axis showing government authority/power. The horizontal axis could vary depending on what one wishes to measure, for example, how socially liberal/conservative one is for example.
Not every location on this chart represents liberal democracy. For argument's sake we can say liberal democrats fall within the circle below:
It is possible to be on the left or the right and support big government or small and still be a liberal Democrat. Most conservatives who claim not to be liberal are wrong. Many progressives who claim to be liberal democrats are also wrong. The determining factor comes down to the extent to which you believe in what we highlighted earlier: private property, market economies, individual rights, secularism, rule of law, economic and political freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion.
It is important to bear this in mind because we are currently beset by politicians on both sides of the aisle who would argue that the system is broken and that significant changes must be made. This argument is possible because the system is not perfect. Poverty and inequality still exist. Political corruption is still an issue. We have inflation, homelessness, drug and housing crises, and crime.
All of these can make it appear that the system is broken, however, it’s important to remember that every single one of these issues is better than it was in the past. Corruption is negligible compared to what exists in societies that do not adhere to core tenets of liberal democracy. Poverty, inequality, and crime have been declining for hundreds of years. Progress is not a straight line but has ups and downs and is susceptible to economic cycles. Overreacting and tearing down what has been responsible for 400 years of progress would be a mistake. Some recent examples of the terrible ideas put forward include:
Dictatorships, even for one day
Stacking the courts or changing them because they aren’t ruling the way you want them too.
Weakening the rule of law (some examples: abolishing prisons, defunding the police, or decriminalizing petty theft)
Letting the government dictate morality (examples include prayer in school and pushing gender ideology)
Wealth taxes – we already have a progressive tax structure which can be modified if deemed necessary to increase taxes on the “wealthy.”
A desire to correct injustice or inequality is admirable. Thinking that there’s an easy fix is not. Improving society is not a question of finding the right formula, we already have it in liberal democracy. The difficult part is understanding that progress is a never-ending fight that requires constant adjustments followed by time to see if those fixes have helped. Liberal democracy is our boat within which we have safety and the promise of economic and social progress. It is imperfect, but the world outside of it is full of dangers that are best avoided. We must resist the temptation of those who promise a better life if only we temporarily leave its safety. Hold fast to Chef’s warning, “Never get out of the boat!”
Wrong Speak is a free-expression platform that allows varying viewpoints. All views expressed in this article are the author's own.
 | A guest post by
|
I'm a conservative republican who happily acknowledges that the particular political tradition that I wish to "conserve" is for the most part Classical Liberalism. I do not criticize leftists by calling them 'Liberal', I criticize them for pushing theories and policies that are actively ILLIBERAL. I do not regard "Progressives" as 'Liberal' in any sense other than that they misappropriated the label when their rightful name was badly discredited by their public failures.
By the same metric though, I also disagree with the way you have likewise employed a meaning of 'Democracy' that has similarly experienced dramatic conceptual drift from its origins as a political concept. What we have in the West today would certainly not qualify as "Democracy" by the standards of Plato. Indeed, our sole concession to that ancient conception is our jury selection, as the only feature of our society that still uses sortition to select common people to act in an official capacity. Nor, by the writings of the Founders, was the United States ever intended to be a "Democracy". They drew a meaningful distinction between a "Democracy" and a "Republic", writing at great length about the dangers and flaws of Democracy, a distinction that you have erased by treating a Constitutional Republic as merely a subtype of Representative Democracy rather than a separate system altogether that deliberately has both democratic and anti-democratic elements.
You've likewise rather stretched somewhat absurdly to present a false "both sides" picture, when it's pretty much entirely the Left that's attempting to remove and replace Classical Liberalism. Your examples are informative in this regard: "dictator for even one day" is clear hyperbole, not an actual attempt to subvert the governing structure like court packing. Sorry, but EVERY campaign makes "On Day 1" promises and Trump's rhetoric on this regard still falls short of his predecessor's "I don't have the Authority, but if Congress won't act, I will!" "I have a pen and a phone." Obama who largely ushered in the era of an Imperial Presidency and Biden having likewise been constantly rebuked by the courts for exceeding his authority. Worse, you've actively misrepresented the position of Classical Liberalism on both "prayer in schools" specifically and moral education in schools in general. Classical Liberalism opposed restricting the religious freedoms of others, the idea that a Teacher or students would not be permitted to voluntarily pray at school would be regarded negatively as imposing a religious test and oppressing both Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Association.
Plato, as later Rousseau, believes that once political society is properly ordered, it can contribute to the restoration of morals. A good political order, good education and upbringing can produce “good natures; and [these] useful natures, who are in turn well educated, grow up even better than their predecessors”
Locke did not contradict this. Education, which Locke felt should address both character and intellect, is therefore best achieved by providing the pupil with examples of proper thought and behaviour, by training the child to witness and share in the habits of virtue that are part of the conventional wisdom of the rational and practical man.
The USA is a constitutional republic. It isn't a liberal democracy. Majority of politicians on both sides of the aisle call it a democracy, but it isn't. There are many democratic form of governments, but we aren't one of them.