Reclaiming liberalism

The county-level voter breakdown for the 2004 presidential election

I have a question: Since when did "liberal" become a bad word?

Dave and I were talking this weekend about the connection between President Bush's appeal to the masses, and how liberals have been branded "elite" in a negative way.

You know, it still amazes me the way the Republicans have been able to turn this one around. "Don't listen to those liberals — they're smarter than you and they hate you. Listen to George Bush; he's a regular guy and understands people like you!"

Liberals have been called out-of-touch "intellectual elite" by conservatives. However, as Dave said, how is it that the Republicans have somehow convinced America that they're NOT the elite?

Have Americans forgotten about big business owners, and the fact that most high-ranking Republicans (and, sure, some Democrats) bring in more per year than regular Americans can ever hope to earn? And, years ago, Bush himself said it best: "Some people call [Republicans] the elite. I call you my base."

So, conservative financial elite is good, and liberal intellectual elite is bad?

Well, let's see. In a recent study, researchers sussed the most and least educated states:

Most educated: Massachusetts, Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, Virginia, New Jersey, Vermont, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Washington.

Least educated: Oklahoma, Tennessee, Louisiana, Alabama, Indiana, Nevada, Arkansas, Mississippi, Kentucky, West Virginia.

I hate to point out the obvious, but I do notice a bit of a prevalence of blue versus red states in each of these lists (according to 2004 presidential election results).

Does this mean all liberal people are smart? No. Does it mean all conservatives are uneducated? Certainly not. However: if one were to draw a loose conclusion from this data, couldn't one say that the more educated a person is, the more likely they are to vote liberal, and vice versa for conservatives?

Granted, people vote according to a great many factors, but is it an accident that Massachusetts — the liberal, gay-loving capital of the east coast — is deemed the most highly educated state in the nation (at over 35% of adults holding a four-year degree)? And West Virginia (sorry, Dave) voted strongly for Bush, but only around 17% of adults there hold a four-year degree?

I think the conservative base in America sees liberals as "evil" because they oppose the conservative stand on such controversial subjects such as women's reproductive rights, gay rights, separation of church and state, and evolution. We even question Bush's stance on the "War on Terror" — for shame! Question our leader? How dare we!

And the kicker is, because so much of the conservative base is uneducated in the first place, they never understand why liberals stand the way they do on the above issues (and many others).

Has learnedness become a negative in today's society? You tell me: people are now voting for a man because, among other reasons, they see him as a person more like themselves, that they could go out for drinks with — someone with whom they could protest against those damnable homosexuals, right? People are refusing to allow schools to teach evolution and sex education: they don't want to be educated. Education is scary.

The political struggle between smart and dumb is the new adult version of making fun of the smart kid in school when he got a better test score than you. Instead of recognizing intelligence as a good thing, people often feel threatened, and it's been so easy for Republicans to take advantage of that.

Don't Americans want their leader to be a better, smarter, and more able person than themselves? Isn't that why they're our leader in the first place? Although it is difficult for people to admit sometimes, Dave said — and I agree — that he would rather have someone smarter than ourselves running the country. Dave's logic: "At my intelligence level, I don't think I could run the country. I want someone who really knows what they're doing, even if I don't understand it."

So, I proclaim I am an intelligent, knowledgeable, and — yes — LIBERAL person. I'm not afraid to admit it.

I am reclaiming the word "liberal" as a positive thing.

I shall not be afraid to mention Charles Darwin, Clarence Darrow, or the Kansas Board of Education at a social gathering.

I recognize that the world changes, and policy is not self-perpetuating. I vow to keep educating myself to keep up with the pace.

I will correctly use the semicolon, ellipses, ampersand, and other punctuation marks with pride. (This has more to do with being educated than being liberal; as far as I can tell, the Democratic Party has no official stance on the semicolon.)

I promise to always question authority when it seems to be overstepping its bounds. I know that keeping our leaders in check is not only a good thing, it's a civic duty and the ultimate act of patriotism.

I will fight for women's rights to make decisions regarding their own bodies.

I will speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues!

Most importantly, I promise not to fear what I do not understand — rather, try to understand it, and make my own judgements based on facts.

This is my manifesto! Go, blue, go!

(Oh, and did I mention I'm disappointed that Illinois wasn't on the list of smartest states in the U.S.? Oh well. Maybe next year.)