The other day, a close acquaintance of mine, whom I like despite what I know of his political views, used the term “damned liberal” in an insulting description of a Democratic politician. I know he is an avid Trump supporter, having heard so from mutual acquaintances, a few of whom are reluctant to associate with him due to some of the things he has posted on Facebook. I don’t participate in Facebook out of principle, so I know him only from interactions related to our common interests. From that relationship, I consider him an honest, decent man with whom I like to associate. I didn’t reply to his comment, preferring to avoid the potential of our political differences interfering with the rapport he and I have. Nevertheless, the situation is an example of how people use political labels to objectify others, sometimes in a negative way as did my acquaintance, and sometimes positively, as in “____ is a true _____” (liberal, conservative, etc.)
Most of us tend to use political labels such as liberal, conservative, progressive, socialist, fascist, leftist, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, independent, Green, RINO (Republican in name only), communist, and so on. While such labels offer an easy way to identify oneself or others, or to make a statement on a bumper sticker, they are simplistic and misleading. Moreover, they feed the sort of tribalism that is infecting American politics and causing rifts among families, friends, and communities.
Political labels are ambiguous. What is a “conservative”? What does he or she want to conserve? What is an “environmentalist” or a “conservationist”? What is a “Libertarian” in reality? (some years ago, a political commentator jokingly described a Libertarian as a Republican with a drug problem) Then there is “progressive.” It is a term often used by the political left in this country, but it, too, is hard to define. It has manifested itself several times over the decades beginning with Theodore Roosevelt who ran for president on the Progressive Party ticket in 1912. When I see politicians or organizations identifying as progressive these days, I wonder what exactly they are progressing. Finally, in some ways, an “Independent” in politics is similar to “free thinker” in religion. It is more ambiguous that the other labels and it does not infer partisan loyalty.
More than a century ago, The Devil’s Dictionary by Ambrose Bierce cynically defined the difference between liberal and conservative this way:
CONSERVATIVE, n. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.
That definition points up the ambiguous, almost theatrical nature of political labels. Bierce also offered a definition of politics that accurately describes current affairs.
POLITICS, n. A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage.
Political affiliations are changeable and confusing as well. For example, in the 19th century, liberal meant opposition to government interference in the “free” market and opposition to what is termed the welfare state. Similarly, the nature of political parties changes, sometimes suddenly. During Reconstruction, Republican policy strongly advocated equal rights for freed slaves, while Southern Democrats were opposed to integration and passed Jim Crow laws. That changed in the last half of 20th century. After the passage of federal civil rights legislation during the Johnson Administration, the “solid” South switched in little more than a decade from a stronghold for the Democratic Party to the reddest Republican region in the nation.
Too frequently labels are used as insults, as was the case with my acquaintance. People who have little idea of what the terms mean slur Republicans as fascists and Democrats as socialists or even communists.
To describe our political landscape, we commonly use the metaphor of a spectrum, a line that spans from left to right, “liberal” to “conservative.” That is simplistic, though, because almost always a person’s political beliefs are more complex than by a single point on the left-right spectrum or by party affiliation whether it is Republican, Democrat, Green, or Libertarian. Often we identify ourselves politically based as much on family tradition, religious faith, profession, economic class, or where we live as by how closely we hew to a particular party’s platform.
Contributing to the complexity of political identification are issues that politicians use as wedges to separate us: gun control, abortion, climate change, health care, etc. Even each of these terms has various shades of meaning that create riffs among us. The issue of abortion is often characterized using the loaded terms of “pro-choice” and “right to life.” Gun control is muddied by debates on “assault weapons.” Climate change is increasingly accepted as a fact, but the political discussions fall into the dichotomy of whether it is the result of human activity or of natural forces. Health care is perhaps the most confused of all with slogans used to politicize the debate: “Obamacare,” “death panels,” “socialized medicine,” and “heartless insurance companies.” Exemplifying the confusion is the famous meme of someone carrying a sign at a Tea Party rally demanding that the government, “keep your hands off of my Medicare.”
There is no absolute Truth in any of these issues. Only ideologues, True Believers (to use Eric Hoffer’s fine term), and cynically ambitious politicians cast these complex issues in simplistic black and white terms of “us” versus “them.”
Despite the name-calling about labels and spittle-flecked ranting of absolutists on these sorts of issues, we have much more in common than separates us. Irrespective of what political label we choose, we all are concerned about our general welfare: our health, our financial security, our safety, our family, and so on. Although we have different ideas on how to achieve and maintain this well-being, there is no sure path to doing so—no party platform, no tax reform plan, no New Deal, no amorphous scheme to make America great again. If we knew the key to governing ourselves, we would have settled the issue long ago. In some ways, we are little if any better at governing ourselves that the Ancient Greeks were 2,500 years ago.
All of us—liberal, conservative, progressive, green, Republican, Democrat, Socialist—are in this society together during good times and bad. We need each other irrespective of the label we sport.