# Has Liberalism Changed? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 23, 2017, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517 "2017-02-23T00:21:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Beren\_Erchamion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/90ced4/32.png) [@Beren\_Erchamion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beren_Erchamion)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2017, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/81 "2017-02-25T01:38:38Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > I’d rather look at a longer time frame. Compare [Classical liberalism - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism) to [Social liberalism - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_liberalism). > > In my opinion, the essence of the change is a shift of priority from limitations on the government to guarantees to the governed. That is, a change from “the state cannot do this” (for example, not restrict speech) to “the state must do this” (for example, provide for the indigent). Of course, there’s a fuzzy boundary and a lot of overlap between the two types of liberalism–it’s the priority that makes the difference. Nope. Priorities are the same, goals are the same. It’s just that today’s liberals have the advantage of a quarter-millennium of advancements in our understanding of how societies work to inform their policy agenda to pursue those goals, that the “classical” liberals didn’t. If they did, they’d agree with the modern liberals. ---
**Author:** ![Beren\_Erchamion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/90ced4/32.png) [@Beren\_Erchamion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beren_Erchamion)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2017, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/82 "2017-02-25T01:51:06Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Prominent Democrats are questioning whether Trump is legitimately an American citizen, and not being slapped down by their fellow Democrats? > > News to me! Based on his behavior, I question whether he meets the 35-year age minimum to hold the office. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2017, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/83 "2017-02-25T02:07:25Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > True that no one bats an eye on “Polish pride” or whatever. > > But black pride is not “Nigerian” pride, or “Ethiopian” pride. It’s just black pride. It is the exact analog of white pride: race, not ethnicity. > [@Velocity](#): > > But as someone pointed out, “black pride” is not the same as Ethiopian/Ghanan/Angolan pride, just like “white pride” is not the same as French/Irish/Swedish pride. That’s what we call a special case. About 80% of black Americans are descended from slaves. The various African cultures the slaves were taken from were deliberately suppressed, and a new cultural identity emerged. Polish, Italian, Irish, and other immigrants did not go through this process. Notably, more recent (and voluntary) immigrants from Africa do maintain those cultural ties. They have that luxury, just like the Irish, Germans, Scandinavians, and the rest do. ---
**Author:** ![brujaja](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4af34b/32.png) [@brujaja](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brujaja)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2017, 4:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/84 "2017-02-25T04:26:21Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > “Institutional” and “systematic wrongs” are phrases that get thrown around a lot. What, specifically do you mean? Thanks for asking. Well, apart from the obvious wrongs associated with slavery, the kind of things I’m talking about are more the hidden kind of wrongs that in my opinion may possibly have done more damage. Things like not being able to go to the college with the best curriculum in your chosen field, because you know you won’t get in, even if your grades are better. Being passed over for promotions. Being hassled way more by police. --But worst of all, in my opinion, are the very small and personal repercussions of predjudice. A wonderful older man I know told me a story once of when he was in college back in the 1960s. He is a black man. He fell in love with a young lady, a white fellow student. He and she both felt that they were soul mates. His father, who was paying the college tuition as many parents do, insisted he stop seeing this girl, or else he would stop paying the bills. The father felt that it could only end badly. When I talked to this man, he was in his sixties or seventies. Yet after all this time, I could tell that he loved her still. And he hated himself for having done what his father asked. It’s no one person’s fault; but the many small tragedies like that one when you put them together add up to a whole lot of demoralizing, sad experience up until very recently. The fact that for decades and decades, no model in a magazine, no Miss America contestent, no gifted actress, was ever black. Imagine the message that little girls got – in a society that values physical appearance for women so highly, the one deal-breaker was simply being black. Imagine being black in the 50s or 60s, knowing that many Americans at that time think black folks are hoodlums and criminals, but also knowing that you’ll never get hired as a cop in your town, to try and correct that impression. You couldn’t do anything to fight crime in your hometown, even if you wanted to. Say you fall in love with the greatest girl in the world. You want to buy her a ring, and propose! – But your job doesn’t pay enough, and no one will give you credit. And no one will sell you a house. And maybe your kids can’t even go to the local school. Can you see how these kind of experiences over time would make a person feel, deep down inside, that there was something wrong with them? That they weren’t as good as other people of a different color, and so they had to give up their dreams and settle for something far more drab and far less magical? How can you be a little black kid who wants to be a scientist or an astronaut, and not be bummed out that as far as you could tell, there were no black scientists or astronauts? So, certainly in the 70s and 80s, events and media focused on a very real and very necessary message to everyone, and especially black youth, that the same American dream **really is** available to them, the same dream that our white kids have always had. It’s possible you’re not old enough to have witnessed the gigantic difference in the public dignity accorded to black folks between the 60s and now; but as someone who was there, I can tell you that all efforts to break black folks out of the tiny pigeonhole they had to live in were absolutely vital. I tell you what, from what I can see, black and white folks have a much healthier, much happier and more easygoing relationship now than ever before in America. We can totally be friends now, it’s not uneasy, it’s not awkward; and this is what I’ve been waiting for my whole life. And this state of affairs would not have been possible without white America going out of their way to say, metaphorically, \*“We’re sorry. We were horribly wrong, and we won’t do it again. Can we be friends?” \* ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2017, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/85 "2017-02-25T23:05:37Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I think I have sensed a bit of this. We have shifted a bit from “great society” liberalism to something else. > > 20 years ago I would have said that any conservative making Harrison Bergeron arguments because of affirmative action were hyperventilating. But more and more we are seeing liberals make the argument that because there is disparity there must be discrimination. > > I think perhaps its a generational thing. I don’t think I have changed, the world did and that’s not the world’s problem, its mine. > > The issues are more subtle than they used to be and AFAICT most of the people using terms like white privilege, trigger warnings and micro-aggression are not using it correctly and the way they use it incorrectly says a lot about the current mentality in society. Well, I’m with you in that. Which isn’t to say the division wasn’t there 20+ years ago. It was. But somehow it seems more prevalent and more self-righteous than before. I mean, I remember the college orientation where they said drunk sex was rape. But it didn’t seem like anybody _believed_ it. I mean, if I called the cops every time I was drunk (or on some mind-altering chemical) and had sex, there’d be any number of innocent women in jail. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2017, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/86 "2017-02-26T01:18:54Z")
> [@brujaja](#): > > **OP:** I too miss the old school type liberal (of which I am one), but not for the reasons you cite. > > 1. Celebrating African heritage is celebrating ethnic heritage. Celebrating “white” heritage is not pride in your ethnicity, it’s pride in your whiteness. Nobody has any problem with, say, Italian pride or Polish pride or whatever. Frankly, I think the term “white pride” is nonsensical. I mean, what characteristics, specifically, are being celebrated when celebrating “white pride?” Even when people say “black pride,” there is an unspoken association of (the majority of) black people with African culture and ethnicity. What is “African culture and ethnicity”? Presumably, in the USA, the wide majority of Blacks don’t have any African culture. The equivalent of “Polish heritage” would be, say, “Congolese heritage” or maybe “Bambara heritage”. And if you consider “being black” or “having African ancestors” as an ethnicity, then I’m not sure why "whiteness"or “having European ancestors” isn’t an ethnicity too. And I guess that people wanting to celebrate white pride associate it with European culture and ethnicity, so, again, I fail to see a difference with black pride being associated with African culture and ethnicity. “Celebrating cultural African-American heritage” or something like that would probably make sense (while presumably excluding recent African immigrants), but I find your arguments very weak, not to say contradictory. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2017, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/87 "2017-02-26T02:04:30Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > My problem with what you call ‘racist’ agitation against Mr Obama is that we now have equivalent agitation against Mr Trump. Is this also racist? White people protesting against a black president is not the the equivalent of white people protesting against a white president. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2017, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/88 "2017-02-26T02:09:36Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > True that no one bats an eye on “Polish pride” or whatever. > > But black pride is not “Nigerian” pride, or “Ethiopian” pride. It’s just black pride. It is the exact analog of white pride: race, not ethnicity. This is a really weak argument. As was already noted, “immigrants” from Africa were brought here by force and were forbidden to maintain any sense of cultural identity with the pre-slavery society they came from. The only cultural identity they had left was the one that couldn’t be taken away from them; their race. ---
**Author:** ![igor\_frankensteen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/839c29/32.png) [@igor\_frankensteen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/igor_frankensteen)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2017, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/89 "2017-02-26T03:10:28Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > The Bernie/Hillary split as a convenient example, though not perfect. > Bernie seemed to be a thouroughgoing old school liberal. Hillary was sort of a half-assed new liberal. > > What I’ll call “old school” liberalism had several core principles. > One was support for the working class, combined with opposition to what I’ll call the ownership class - rent seekers, and others who are rich, but don’t work. > Another was support for freedom of speech, combined with the rejection of dogma. > A third was opposition to classification, or different treatment of people, on the basis of race or gender, or religion. MLK’s “I Have A Dream,” is an example. > > There are others, but I’ll leave it there for now. > > New school liberalism, on the other hand, embraces identity politics. To be non-white, non-Christian, or non-male is something to be celebrated. New school liberalism separates people into two groups: the privileged, and under-privileged. They’re identified, not by wealth; but by race, gender, sexual orientation, and religion. To celebrate African American heritage is admirable. Celebrating white heritage is racist. Similarly, “A Day Without Women” is encouraged. “A Day Without Men” is sexist. > > It’s an explicit rejection of MLK’s idea. It creates concepts like “micro-aggressions,” “trigger warnings,” and violent protests against the possibility of someone speaking who is antithetical to new liberalism’s agenda. It is, in other words, not at all friendly toward free speech. > > The dichotomy is not new, exactly. It’s been around at least 30 years. But new liberalism seems to be on the ascendency, and old liberalism seems to be waning. > > So my question is, is this something only I have noticed, or have others noted the same thing? I have another thought on this opening post. That is, that I can see on another reading of it, that it contains a basic error. It conflates LIBERALISM, with A PARTICULAR GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO ARE PUSHING AN AGENDA WHILE BEING REFERRED TO AS LIBERALS. I think it’s important to recognize that there’s a difference between that, and discussing Liberalism itself, since there is no Liberal Party (at least in the US). It might be more correct to say that Liberalism had a collection of ideals and concepts, and that certain groups (such as the Democrats of yesteryear) decided to champion SOME OF THOSE IDEALS, partly because they believed in them as well, and partly for political advantage. Some people who decided to try to effect change inspired by Liberal ideals, came up with procedures to do so, which entirely undermined those very ideals. That didn’t change LIBERALISM, it just changed how truly representative of Liberalism those people could be accurately said to be. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2017, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/90 "2017-02-26T05:24:48Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > Why does giving voice to minorities not become anti-white or anti-male but giving voice to whites or males become anti-minority? Is there something especially evil about the majority that they can not have a voice without suppressing others? Are you seriously trying to claim that white men don’t have a voice in running America? ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2017, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/91 "2017-02-27T03:40:08Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I think I have sensed a bit of this. We have shifted a bit from “great society” liberalism to something else. > > 20 years ago I would have said that any conservative making Harrison Bergeron arguments because of affirmative action were hyperventilating. But more and more we are seeing liberals make the argument that because there is disparity there must be discrimination. I call this “outcome-based reality”: if the result is exactly the same as if it were done on purpose, then effectively it is on purpose. I think this is a manifestation of the shift you mentioned; it’s like formerly liberals called for justice and now they’re calling for victory. Taken to an extreme this leads to the attitude of “to Hell with what’s fair- we want ours!” ---
**Author:** ![brujaja](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4af34b/32.png) [@brujaja](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brujaja)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2017, 11:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/92 "2017-02-27T11:50:09Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > And I guess that people wanting to celebrate white pride associate it with European culture and ethnicity, so, again, I fail to see a difference with black pride being associated with African culture and ethnicity. I understand what you’re saying. Logically, if we accept that “black pride” connotes a generalized association with a very broad origin and culture, then we should grant the term “white pride” that same connotation. I guess what it comes down to is the simple fact that “white pride” (as a phrase, not an abstract concept) comes along with the pre-existing baggage of a strong association with “white supremacy,” KKK, etc. Don’t forget that “white pride,” as such, was around long before anyone dared to even think of trying to assert “black pride.” So we are left with this unfortunate situation where two terms that logically one would expect to be simply variants of the same positive, socially acceptable values – are not, not at all. It is unfortunately true that the one term is bad and the other good. Just please don’t make the mistake of thinking that anyone is trying to say that white folks of whatever ethnicity shouldn’t or aren’t allowed to also have pride in their own cultural heritage. I see a lot of people reacting this way, and I think it’s a damn shame. People are left feeling animosity and resentment, and it doesn’t have to happen. I personally am very proud of my Italian heritage, and I’m a diehard classic bleeding-heart liberal. Remember, though, that even though you may mean one thing when you say “white pride,” many other people will assume you mean something else completely; and you can’t really blame them for that when Wikipedia itself says, under “white pride:” _White pride is a motto primarily used by white separatist, white nationalist, neo-Nazi and white supremacist organizations in order to signal racist or racialist viewpoints._ ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2017, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/93 "2017-02-28T03:57:57Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > It’s not liberals who are obsessed with these issues. Look at the liberal focus through any reasonable lens–the Democratic 2016 platform, bills introduced in Congress, column inches in the NYT or Washington Post, you name it–and you’ll see far more time spent by liberals on issues like environmental concerns, economic issues, and international issues. > > Yes, issues of gender and sexual preference are important to liberals, despite what you’d prefer. But suggesting that liberals are “mostly concerned” with these issues is divorced from reality. One reason Trump succeeded - despite historically high disapproval ratings and being completely unqualified - is he was able to paint himself as an advocate for US national interests, while liberals came to be seen as advocates for identity politics. There’s nothing wrong with being concerned for the well-being of the transgendered. But to succeed, Democrats need big ideas - like Sanders’ proposal for tuition-free universities. Trump had big ideas. You may not like them, but you can’t say they weren’t bold. What was Hillary’s big idea? ---
**Author:** ![brujaja](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4af34b/32.png) [@brujaja](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brujaja)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2017, 8:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/94 "2017-02-28T08:35:24Z")
It’s funny that people see the left as obsessed with identity politics, because it seems to me that it is the (alt)right who are conspicuously concerned with them these days: Trump insults Mexicans as rapists and “bad hombres” Trump wants to bar Muslims from entering, and banish many already here Trump administration removes advisories protecting LGBT students’ human rights A Republican in the Senate basically tells a female Senator to shut up Alt-right people all over America are violently attacking Muslims, Jews, and blacks It feels to me like the right is going around producing a veritable s\*\*tstorm of legal, ideological, and physical abuse of minorities and women, and then accusing the left of being obsessed with “identity politics” when we stand up to defend them. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2017, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/95 "2017-02-28T14:30:08Z")
> [@brujaja](#): > > It’s funny that people see the left as obsessed with identity politics, because it seems to me that it is the (alt)right who are conspicuously concerned with them these days: > > Trump insults Mexicans as rapists and “bad hombres” > Trump wants to bar Muslims from entering, and banish many already here > Trump administration removes advisories protecting LGBT students’ human rights > A Republican in the Senate basically tells a female Senator to shut up > Alt-right people all over America are violently attacking Muslims, Jews, and blacks > > It feels to me like the right is going around producing a veritable s\*\*tstorm of legal, ideological, and physical abuse of minorities and women, and then accusing the left of being obsessed with “identity politics” when we stand up to defend them. Exactly. But good news! The right now accepts Catholics and southern and eastern Europeans as “normal”. Give them another hundred years or so for the rest. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![sear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cab0a1/32.png) [@sear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sear)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2017, 6:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/96 "2017-03-06T06:50:48Z")
**" Has Liberalism Changed? (Multi-page thread 1 2) "** > [@](#): > > “It [liberal] is pretty much now a lost word, in the original sense of being an effort to restrain government; and one has to keep that in mind when using it.” William F. Buckley Jr. April 2, 2000 on C-SPAN ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2017, 8:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/97 "2017-03-06T08:41:05Z")
> [@Doubticus](#): > > I had a friend that made this awesome post about the “Black Lives Matter” movement, that illustrates my point perfectly. > > He said: > > Responding to “Black Live Matter” with “All Lives Matter” doesn’t mean you’re racist. It does mean you’re tone deaf, though. > All too often, it is demonstrated that black lives DON’T matter–not equally, and especially not in matters of justice and authority–so finding fault with someone trying to point out that _very real problem_ by complaining that the words they use in their cry for help aren’t inclusive enough for your tastes is: > > A. not helpful to them at all. > B. needlessly semantic. > C. a hurtful diversion of the conversation away from the continuing problem that still hasn’t been fixed. > and, yes: > D. dismissive, because you’re acting like your umbrage at their choice of words is more important than the repeated loss of life that prompted this whole conversation in the first place. > > This is quite literally a life and death situation for a lot of people. When someone falls overboard and yells “I need a life preserver!” the appropriate response isn’t to stand on deck and yell back: “We all need life preservers!” Thank you for this eloquent post. But I would add that “tone deafness” carried to extremes is implicitly racist. I take the side of OP in this debate _not_ because I oppose progressive policies, but because _the progressives’ highest priority should be to win elections_. The morally corrupt GOP now controls all three branches of the federal government and most of the states; surely that proves my point. However > [@puddleglum](#): > > Responding all lives matter is affirming the common humanity of all people regardless of color. It is affirming that matters about people is not their race but their inherent worth as individuals… > > Black Lives Matter protests show how much liberalism has changed. It was once about judging people by the content of their character and now it is about how [white](https://news.grabien.com/story-dnc-chair-candidates-bash-white-people-racially-charged-foru)people need to shut their mouths. :mad: I’ll do **puddleglum** the courtesy of saying he is just frighteningly tone deaf. ---
**Author:** ![Stringbean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Stringbean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stringbean)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/98 "2017-03-07T01:20:09Z")
I think liberalism changed when it stopped seeking to correct overt injustice and instead focused on preventing implied injustice. For example, denying a student admission to a college based solely on his or her gender, versus asking your friend who happens to be Asian if the two of you would like to work on your Physics homework together. To a modern liberal, these are both seen as exemplars of injustice. They have won so many battles since the 60s that they now conjure new, foolish ones to wage. It destroys their credibility. ---
**Author:** ![Beren\_Erchamion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/90ced4/32.png) [@Beren\_Erchamion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beren_Erchamion)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/99 "2017-03-07T01:50:31Z")
> [@Stringbean](#): > > I think liberalism changed when it stopped seeking to correct overt injustice and instead focused on preventing implied injustice. > > For example, denying a student admission to a college based solely on his or her gender, versus asking your friend who happens to be Asian if the two of you would like to work on your Physics homework together. > > To a modern liberal, these are both seen as exemplars of injustice. They have won so many battles since the 60s that they now conjure new, foolish ones to wage. It destroys their credibility. I’m sorry that the fact that we now realize and understand things we didn’t before is something you find so objectionable. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Ace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/6bbea6/32.png) [@Johnny\_Ace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Ace)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517/100 "2017-03-07T06:36:01Z")
> [@Stringbean](#): > > I think liberalism changed when it stopped seeking to correct overt injustice and instead focused on preventing implied injustice. > > For example, denying a student admission to a college based solely on his or her gender, versus asking your friend who happens to be Asian if the two of you would like to work on your Physics homework together. > > To a modern liberal, these are both seen as exemplars of injustice. They have won so many battles since the 60s that they now conjure new, foolish ones to wage. It destroys their credibility. You’d think they’d passed important things like restroom-restriction laws, or voter ID laws with the _expressed_ intent of cutting down on predominantly-Democratic votes, or forced the shutdown of numerous abortion clinics to make it less available and possible for those who don’t live in an urban setting. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-liberalism-changed/780517.md?page=6)