NationStates Jolt Archive

We all know that for Americans, the word "liberal" means something very different from the original meaning of the word, as it is still used for example in Europe.

A Liberal (the word having to do with the concept of "liberty") wants everyone to live their life as they see fit, believes in the primacy of the individual over the collective, and is therefore very much against government involvement into people's lives or businesses.

In the US however, the words seems to mean the exact opposite.

I've heard theories about how the Left "stole" the word from the classic liberals - but I've seen no facts to back them up.

So why is it that there is such a difference in meaning? I'm genuinely curious, and I hope someone can shed some light of this ... peculiarity.

The simple answer is... it doesn't. Mean the exact opposite, anyway - unless you're talking on Fox News or similar "right-wing" organ, in which case you want it to be taken that way for your own purposes.

"Liberal" refers, in America, to a more-or-less continuous coalition stretching back in history. It is primarily defined by the belief that the government has little business in regulating morality, that all sorts of people (women, black people, etc etc) are created equal and a generally "progressive" (i.e., looking-toward-the-future) view.

In Belgium, Liberals usually means the political party for entrepreneurs and small companies.

We all know that for Americans, the word "liberal" means something very different from the original meaning of the word, as it is still used for example in Europe.

A Liberal (the word having to do with the concept of "liberty") wants everyone to live their life as they see fit, believes in the primacy of the individual over the collective, and is therefore very much against government involvement into people's lives or businesses.

In the US however, the words seems to mean the exact opposite.

I've heard theories about how the Left "stole" the word from the classic liberals - but I've seen no facts to back them up.

So why is it that there is such a difference in meaning? I'm genuinely curious, and I hope someone can shed some light of this ... peculiarity.

Why dont we call elevators lifts? Why dont we call cigarrettes fags? It just has a different meaning here. Don't worry about it.

In Belgium, Liberals usually means the political party for entrepreneurs and small companies.
It's funy but the Australia 'Liberal' party is actualy the conservative party that wants to dictate morality and supports large corporations (particularly multinationals) over smal business and entrepreneurs.
Liberal by name but definitely not by nature.

what is a liberal in europe is a libertarian in america

Strictly speaking a liberal is the same in Europe and America however for a liberal government you don't need to have everything a liberal would believe in. EG. Limited government, constitution, Judicial review.

In some ways America is not liberal and so to Britian is not entirely liberal but we have enough of the concepts to qualify. Blair himself has put lots of constriants on the government and could be called a liberal.

The simple answer is... it doesn't. Mean the exact opposite, anyway - unless you're talking on Fox News or similar "right-wing" organ, in which case you want it to be taken that way for your own purposes.

"Liberal" refers, in America, to a more-or-less continuous coalition stretching back in history. It is primarily defined by the belief that the government has little business in regulating morality, that all sorts of people (women, black people, etc etc) are created equal and a generally "progressive" (i.e., looking-toward-the-future) view.

If liberals think that these people are created equal and are all about equality, than why are they always trying to push for more and more unequal treatment like affirmitive action, positive discrimination, extra scholarships for blacks only, when everyone knows that if there was a white only scholarship people would riot. It seems to me, that conservatives are the ones that are looking for the REAL equality, none of this positive inequality. I mean come on, whos the racists, the one that wants to treat everyone the same and wishes that everything was colorblind, or the one that thinks that blacks arnt smart enough to compete with white people so they need extra help...It seems to me that liberals seem to think blacks arnt as able as whites...:confused:

I've heard theories about how the Left "stole" the word from the classic liberals - but I've seen no facts to back them up.

So why is it that there is such a difference in meaning? I'm genuinely curious, and I hope someone can shed some light of this ... peculiarity.
I suspect it's partially due to the use of Aesopean language by the American communists prior to WWII, and partially due to the Roosevelt Administration's attempts to use "big government" to end the Great Depression.

In Britain the conservative party is "liberal" economically how a european would describe it, although Conservative in social policy whilst the liberal democrats are "liberal" how an american would describe it but not how a European would. Its just plain confusing.

It's funy but the Australia 'Liberal' party is actualy the conservative party that wants to dictate morality and supports large corporations (particularly multinationals) over smal business and entrepreneurs.
Liberal by name but definitely not by nature.

True but at least they are not republicans, and can actually run the country, unlike Labor

Why dont we call cigarrettes fags?

Because it's not very nice and hurts their feelings. :(