Is Nox Nova a liberal blog? Henry asked this question a while back in a very nice video post. Of course, I am called “liberal” constantly, both by contributors to this blog, and by others, in and out of the comments box. I have to admit, this is one thing that really annoys me, mainly because it never goes away. People use that label thoughtlessly and carelessly, giving implicit endorsement to the false distinctions that underpin American politics.
Very briefly, a “liberal” is a person influenced by an Enlightenment-era anthropology predicated on the notion of individual liberty as the foundation of society. Society is reduced to a mere social contract between individuals and private liberty always supplants the common good. Instead of being based on God’s will, morality is now based on self-interest. As someone once said, a person’s rights ended only where another person’s nose began! Thus “free” market exchange is virtuous, without regard for any resulting injustice or inequality. The only form of permissible government becomes “liberal” democracy, as other custom-based systems of governance are not sufficiently underpinned by individual self-determination and do not provide the architecture needed for the necessary social contract. A woman has the “right” to do as she wishes with her own body, with no regard for another living person growing inside her, because, after all, in a society based on social contracts, the unborn are not really in a position to negotiate. And marriage becomes about the fulfilment of individual wants and desires, and not about the bearing and rearing of children. What I am trying to do with these examples is obvious. Deep down, there is little difference between the ideology on the right and the left of US politics, as they accept the same philosophical foundation.
If you are even slightly familiar with my posts, you will be aware that I do not support these positions. I accept the free market (especially against the statist alternative), but insist that it must be subservient to the common good, and recognize the right of the authorities to intervene along these lines. In economics, I am a proud corporatist in a era when that term is most definitely out of fashion. I have much affinity for old-style European Christian Democracy. I have very little respect for the modern nation state, and am a big fan of both autonomous local communities and broad supranational institutions like the United Nations and the European Union. I think nationalism is a source of great evil. I find the zeal to impose “liberal democracy” on all countries to be an exercise in political utopianism on the scale of Marxism. So, call me what you like, but bear in mind that Ted Kennedy and Nancy Pelosi probably view the world somewhat differently.
Back to the point in question: I see that my favorable attitude toward Obama has promoted a lot of criticism lately. I believe one other Vox Novacontributor supports Obama. Others have said favorable things about Mike Huckabee, Fred Thompson, John McCain, and Ron Paul (these are what come to mind, there may be more). And yet, when contributors nod toward Republicans, this does not warrant a mention. When a small number say nice things about a Democrat, however, all hell breaks loose. As I’ve said many times, I’m happy to debate the issues until the cows come home. And I have absolutely no problem with Catholics opting for Republicans based on the abortion issue. I do, however, have a major problem with people who think that all good Catholics should either abstain or perform obeisance toward the Republican party. And we seem to be seeing a lot of that around here these days.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In