Famous liberals in history- a question

[panader0]

I get tired of seeing that annoying "Annoy a Liberal" bumpersticker and I want to be able to rebut with some great liberals in history, especially US history. I have seen the "Jesus was a Liberal" sticker. Anyone with some good suggestions? Would Washington, Franklin and Jefferson qualify? I saw the quote recently by Samuel Adams " I hope history will forget that ye were our countrymen" to the conservatives. So the called them cons then, did they use the term liberals too?

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Liberals All

In general, the Founders would be considered Liberals today. They were (obviously) proponents of moving power from the few, to the many - the crux of Liberalism. Most did not believe in organized religion, and certainly did not believe that government should be driven by religion.

Franklin was most clearly a Liberal: there was not a right-wing bone in his body. He believed that government should do whatever government does well - for example, he founded the US Postal Service.

Washington was sort of a half-in-the-closet Liberal. For example, he gave lip service to the importance of the Bible, but would not take Communion himself. He wrote: "As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality."

Jefferson was a liberal, a steadfast proponent of freedom of the press. For example, he wrote: "No experiment can be more interesting than that we are now trying, and which we trust will end in establishing the fact, that man may be governed by reason and truth. Our first object should therefore be, to leave open to him all the avenues to truth. The most effectual hitherto found, is the freedom of the press. It is, therefore, the first shut up by those who fear the investigation of their actions." (emphasis mine)

Some other quotes:

"They may introduce the practice of France, Spain, and Germany--of torturing, to extort a confession of the crime. They will say that they might as well draw examples from those countries as from Great Britain, and they will tell you that there is such a necessity of strengthening the arm of government, that they must have a criminal equity, and extort confession by torture, in order to punish with still more relentless severity. We are then lost and undone." - Patrick Henry

"Serving God is Doing Good to Man, but Praying is thought an easier Service, and therefore more generally chosen." - Abraham Lincoln

"Every gun that's made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms...is spending the genius of its scientists, the sweat of its laborers,..." - Dwight Eisenhower

For more, see my blog.

[Poppyseedman]

4. The founders would be considered "Classical Liberals" today

Washington and Hamilton were Federalist. Jefferson and Madison were democrat-republicans with evolved into todays democratic party.

Take a progressive today and plant them in the 18th century and most would identify with the Federalist positions. That is a broad statement and can easily be argued either way.

It is a very difficult thing to label our founders with what political labels we use today.

Most founders, I think would be absolutely horrified at the level of federal influence over states and the citizens that occurs in todays political environment.

They would say we need a second revolution to reinvigorate the 9th and 10th amendment.

[MannyGoldstein]

5. Another Way to Look At It...

If we took the Founders and plopped them down in the present, where would their sympothies lie? How would they behave?

I believe they would be powerfully repelled by the Right, and would end up in the Feingold and Conyers area of the spectrum.

Just a (slightly-educated) guess.

[Poppyseedman]

6. A slightly more -educated guess

As someone who has read vast amounts of the founders written words and more history books than I care to brag about from the period of pre - 1492 to the American Civil war.

(It's a hobby, not a profession)

I can tell you with a certain amount of understanding our founders would not be near the Feingold and Conyers area of the spectrum.

The level of federal involvement in our lives would astound them. They would be calling for a second revolution

[MannyGoldstein]

10. Tyranny

I've also done a fair bit of reading, particularly on the founding of the US and the rise and fall of Nazi Germany - how nations go good, and how they go bad.

I think the single objective that tied the founders together most tightly was the defeat of tyranny. I believe that is also the most salient characteristic of Feingold and Conyers as well - they are virtually alone in our legislature in trying to stave off tyranny - and in their willingness to get bloodied in order to do the correct thing, another hallmark of our Founders.

After the defeat of tyranny, there are a range of views amongst the Founders.

They were all (or nearly all) against the influence of organized religion on government, i.e., against faith substituted for observable reality - again, a hallmark of today's Liberals.

Economically, true, they were more of a mixed bag: Jefferson preached small government - most of the time. Franklin would best be described as a "pragmatist", i.e., do whatever works best. And so forth.

[Poppyseedman]

11. I am one of the few around here that do not buy into the premise we are on

verge of bush imposed tyranny. Otherwise, I agree with your post.

I know that is not very progressive of me not to believe the tyranny template, but after January 20th, 2009 when we peacefully transfer power from the bush administration to hopefully a democratic elected Whitehouse, many people around here have some serious explaining to do.

[TreasonousBastard]

12. Not Hamilton and his side...

seems to me we're pretty much right where the serious Federalists would have liked us to be.

But, yes, some of the excesses now might even shock Hamilton. And the "Imperial Presidency" would probably shock them all-- the balance of power they worked so hard for has been tilted for years.

[bryant69]

7. Although in many ways the modern Democratic party owes more to

Hamilton than Jefferson. Hamilton was the one who believed that government could accomplish things and be a tool of the American people. Granted h was more pro business, but i'm not sure that means the same thing in the 18th century (when business was somewhat powerless).

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Poppyseedman]

8. Shhhhhh. Don't let the cat out of the bag

Way too many people here think Jefferson and Madison are liberal icons.

If anything Jefferson would lean more to what we call the republicans today than liberals. He was the first US President to send Marines to fight Islam in North Africa. I wonder if the party today would approve of that?

Washington and Hamilton would be lean more to what we consider liberal: big government, federal over sight, weak state rights.

[bryant69]

9. That's the thing

You can't really draw a straight line from any of the founders to the modern days. Because certainly Democratic rhetoric borrows a lot more from Jefferson than Hamilton. And Rhetoric is more important than people think.

Bryant

[doubleplusgood]

2. here's some on my list

Liberal/Conservative (with conservative meaning suspicious of change & wishing to maintain the status quo)

Jesus/Caiaphas
Galileo/The Pope
George Washington/Benedict Arnold
Abraham Lincoln/Jefferson Davis
Martin Luther King/Jesse Helms
Mikhail Gorbachev/Leonid Brezhnev

I am hard-pressed to see how anyone could consider themselves proud to call themselves conservatives. Have conservatives ever done or supported anything beneficial in human history?

[genie_weenie]

3. It's a famous and *flawed* technique

to apply current values and labels to "Great Persons" in history.

George Washington was not a liberal. He was an aristocratic man who did not believe in Democracy (none of thje Founders did) because the People were stupid and needed to be lead. He was also very un-Liberal when he put down the Whiskey "Rebellion" and when he worked to create a Strong Central Government after Shays "Rebellion".

[Marr]

13. History has a way of sweeping real populists under the rug.

At least, our present system of recording history does. Very often it seems, some politician will get the credit for making a thing happen, when they really only ran in front of a moving parade and claimed to be leading it.