# Liberal is not a naughty word **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 8, 2004, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950 "2004-08-08T23:45:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2004, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/1 "2004-08-08T23:45:20Z")
[Dictionary.com](http://Dictionary.com) lists the definition like this: \*\*Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.\*\* How is being broad minded, free from bigotry, and open to new ideas for progress a bad thing in any way? For that matter, how is conservative not a four letter word? It means: **Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.** Looking back through history, hasn’t it always been the liberals who have championed positive changes? If the conservatives consistantly had their way throughout history, blacks would still be slaving away in the cotton fields and women couldn’t vote. Why isn’t conservative a bad word? ---
**Author:** ![EsotericEnigma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e274bd/32.png) [@EsotericEnigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EsotericEnigma)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2004, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/2 "2004-08-08T23:48:42Z")
Well, i’m sold. ---
**Author:** ![Celyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9dc877/32.png) [@Celyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Celyn)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2004, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/3 "2004-08-09T00:04:42Z")
Well said, that man. You fight the good fight, **Blalron**! 🙂 I’ve noticed on message board (I am thinking of another one, not the SDMB exactly) that a LOT of U.S. people seem to equate “liberal” with “spawn of Satan”. There’s \*soome \* of that tendency in Britain too - eg some people who love to whine about"liberal do-gooders" ☹ but my impression is that that misuse seems quite widespread over in the States. Didn’t Confucious say that “the first thing to be done is the Rectification of Names”? Something like that anyway. But I reckon sloppy use of language does not bode well for the thinking skills. So I wish you luck in reclaiming “liberal”. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2004, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/4 "2004-08-09T00:38:46Z")
This might help a bit with the “Rectification of Names” bit. Or it might not. From the Wikipedia ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal)): > [@](#): > > The word liberal, like liberty, derives from the Latin liber (“free”). In religion and politics, to be liberal is to be tolerant or open-minded, to favour freedom over control. In other words, a liberal is someone who adheres to the ideology of liberalism. . . . Be aware that the meaning of the word liberal or liberalism can be different in various countries and can be related to the bolitical background of the user. Therefore it can have various meanings throughout Wikipedia. . . . > > In the United States, liberal is sometimes used as an antonym for Conservative or a synonym for left-wing. There, it primarily refers to the New Deal variant of liberalism, emphasizing the positive role of the state. In other countries, liberal may have quite an opposite meaning: for instance, in France a liberal is a right-wing or libertarian proponent of free markets. Some would use liberal in the classical liberal meaning of the word, others would prefer the social liberal meaning of the word. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism:) > [@](#): > > The word **liberalism** has several different, but generally related, meanings. > > The editors of the Spanish constitution of Cadiz in 1812 were the first to use the word liberal in a political sense. They named themselves the **Liberales,** to state that they opposed the absolutist power of the Spanish monarchy. The original meaning of the term “liberal” refers to a tradition, a political philosophy, originally founded on the Enlightenment tradition, that tries to circumscribe the limits of political power, and to define and support individual rights. This is often called **classical liberalism** and is related (though not identical) to the ideology known as libertarianism. The original Enlightenment liberals were outsiders proposing a new order, but beginning in the late 19th century, liberals began coming to power in various countries. This brings a new usage: the term “liberalism” significantly evolves from classical liberalism and diverges from one country to another. The liberalism of the liberal parties and modern liberal thinkers is what we call political liberalism: its ideological contents depend on the geographical context. Many (classical) liberal values, like representative democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of thought, have been adopted by thinkers of other ideologies. Its influence has been so widespread that the majority of Western countries are considered to be liberal democracies. There is a difference between Capital-“L” Liberal and small-“l” liberal: In most countries, Capital-“L” Liberal is used to label the members of sympathisers of a Liberal party, while small-“l” liberal is used to label the adherents of liberalism. > > Related usages are **Economic liberalism** and the closely related **Neoliberalism.** They evolve also from classical liberalism and insist upon the necessity of free trade and see no merit in a government that meddles in the marketplace. Some forms of economic liberalism oppose cartels and monopolies as market-distorting factors comparable to government intervention in markets; neoliberals are generally more tolerant of monopolies and cartels than of government regulation. Neoliberalism borrows from some of the ideas of classic liberalism, but departs significantly in other ways. Neoliberalism rejects the New Deal and welfarism and its popularity is typically ascribed to Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, who were politically quite distant from many of the non-economic views generally associated with liberalism and adhered to conservatism. Neoliberalism is not a form of liberalism, but is only limited to economics. Neoliberals can be liberals, but they can also be conservatives or moderate social democrats. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism:) > [@](#): > > **Progressive** is a term often used by those on the political left to describe their beliefs. This term is preferred by many over the more traditional label in American politics, liberal, because of the association of liberal with the centrist politics of many Democratic Party politicians (such as Al Gore) in recent years. The word “liberal” has become essentially pejorative, through the consistent usage by critics; one is much more likely to see “liberal” in the mode of “Tax-and-spend liberal,” than in any sort of positive context. The term progressive is thus used to avoid confusion between the politicized term liberal and genuine philosophical views focused on social change. Progressive is technically a loaded term, as it may imply that those opposed to “progressive” views are automatically regressive. > > Progressive is used in place of liberal to best describe philosophical ideals that are opposite and contrasted to those held by conservatives. Political ideas that advocate rapid social change are likely to be progressive, while conservative ideas tend to reflect an adherence to established norms and support for (or furtherance of) the status quo. Continuing logically, by this spectrum, a philosophy that advocated reversing course to previous standards would be regressive, though this term is rarely used. Instead, the term reactionary is more frequently used to describe those who wish to return to previously established convention. > > This is particularly useful when dealing with philosophical positions, since the liberal tradition has very particular and fixed Enlightenment connotations that may not necessarily have any useful meaning in the left political scene. > > The term has its origin in American politics in the early part of the twentieth century. During this period, known as the Progressive Era, which saw the brief rise of the U.S. Progressive Party, many reforms were enacted. Some third-party presidential candidates ran for office during this time under the Progressive Party label, notably Robert M. La Follette, Sr. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism:) > [@](#): > > Conservatism or political conservatism can refer to any of several historically related political philosophies or political ideologies. There are also a number of Conservative political parties in various countries. All of these are primarily (though not necessarily exclusively) identified with the political right. > > Among the significant usages of the term “conservatism” are: > > 1. **Classical conservatism** or institutional conservatism - Opposition to rapid change in governmental and societal institutions. This kind of conservatism is anti-ideological insofar as it emphasizes means (slow change) over ends (any particular form of government). To the classical conservative, whether one arrives at a right- or left-wing government is less important than whether change is effected through rule of law rather than through revolution and sudden innovation. > > The classic conservative critique of radical excess is Edmund Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution in France. > > 1. **Modern conservatism** or right conservatism - In contrast to the anti-ideological classical conservatism, right conservatism is ideological. It is typified by two distinct subideologies: social conservatism and fiscal conservatism which often come together in an economic conservatism. Together, these subideologies comprise the conservative ideology in most English-speaking countries: separately, these subideologies are incorporated into other political positions. > > Social conservatism is generally dominated by defense of existing social norms and values, of local customs and of societal evolution, rather than social innovation. Applied to foreign policy, a mild social conservatism manifests itself in Rudyard Kipling’s defense of the Indian natives against British imperialism and in American opposition to the “forced democratization” of post-war Iraq. In its more extreme foreign-policy manifestations, social conservatism breeds nationalism, tending towards isolationism, on the order of Pat Buchanan’s anti-immigration, anti-internationalist stance. > > Fiscal conservatism is the stance that the government must “live within its means”. Above all, fiscal conservatives oppose excessive government debt; this belief in balanced budgets tends to be coupled with a belief that government welfare programs should be narrowly tailored and that tax rates should be low, which implies relatively small goverment institutions. > > This belief in small government combines with fiscal conservatism to produce a broader ecomomic conservatism, which wishes to minimize government intervention in the economy. This amounts to support for laissez faire capitalism, and usually extends to opposing graduated taxes as unfair to the top tiers, proposing instead flat taxes, opposing welfare as unnecessary and counterproductive, opposing so-called double-taxation (taxing both companies and individuals during along the path of a transaction), and calling for broad deregulation of industry and a substantially decreased government bureaucracy. For some this is a matter of principle, as it is for the libertarians and others influenced by thinkers such as Ayn Rand and Ludwig von Mises, who believe that government intervention in the economy is inevitably wasteful and inherently immoral. For others, it shades off into business conservatism, a de facto politics of support for the interests of the business-owning class. Business conservatism is conservative in the sense of wishing to keep wealth and power in the hands that currently hold them, but is far more simply pragmatic and instrumental than either classical conservatism or other forms of modern conservatism: for example, business conservatives often lobby for government subsidies that would be rejected by those whose conservatism is more purely a matter of principle. > > Economic and fiscal conservatism coupled with liberalism is called (at least in the U.S.) “libertarianism”, or (in its more extreme forms) “right-wing anarchism” or "anarcho-capitalism. An openness to government intervention in the economy coupled with social conservatism is typical of right-wing populism and (in its more extreme forms) fascism. > > 1. **Neoconservatism** – strictly a U.S. term – may be an oxymoron, but refers to a subclass of conservatives that support a more assertive foreign policy coupled with one or more other facets of modern conservatism. Historically, conservatives tend to be mildly isolationist, but with the rising internationalism represented by such groups as NATO or the UN, neoconservatism is on the rise. The “unipolar” assertions of columnist Charles Krauthammer are an example of neoconservatism. Neoconservatism underlies the policy of the George W. Bush administration in the Middle East, including (but not limited to) the 2003 Iraq War and its aftermath. > > 2. “Compassionate conservatism” a term popularized by George W. Bush, is held by many conservatives to be redundant, and a public-relations buzzword. Insofar as the presidency of George W. Bush has increased welfare substantially in the form of Medicare reforms and the No Child Left Behind act, it may be that compassionate conservativism is simply the synthesis of social conservatism and fiscal liberalism. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2004, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/5 "2004-08-09T00:52:47Z")
> [@](#): > > “Compassionate conservatism” a term popularized by George W. Bush, is held by many conservatives to be redundant, and a public-relations buzzword. Others say it’s an oxymoron. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2004, 6:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/6 "2004-08-09T06:35:13Z")
If words always meant exactly what the dictionaries say, then perhaps there wouldn’t be an issue. To many people, liberal = big government, but you won’t find that in the dictionary. And most Democrats know that. Hence it’s only the rare Democract who is a self-described liberal. Is it really any more complicated than that? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2004, 11:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/7 "2004-08-09T11:10:12Z")
Here’s another excellent resource on the roots of liberalism, and it might help to understand how the term has morphed into its popular meaning today of what used to be centrism. > **[Liberalism: In the Classical Tradition | Ludwig von Mises](https://mises.org/library/liberalism-classical-tradition)** > > This is Mises's classic statement in defense of a free society, one of the last statements of the old liberal school and a text from which we can continue to learn. It has been the conscience of a global movement for liberty for 80 years. The entire text can be read online. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2004, 12:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/8 "2004-08-09T12:05:46Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > And most Democrats know that. Hence it’s only the rare Democract who is a self-described liberal. Yippee! I’m rare! Of course, liberalism is not a dirty word. Many of the liberal idea have become mainstream- social security, integration, voting rights, women’s rights, etc. We tend to take these societal advances for granted without remembering from whence they came. As Al Sharpton pointed out, if George W. Bush had appointed the Supreme Court in 1954, Clarence Thomas would never have gotten into law school. There is some kernel of truth in the hyperbole. The “conservatives” have traditionally fought against every civil rights movement in history- whether it was the Voting Rights Act of 1964, the ERA in the 1970s, or gay rights today. In the sense that “liberal” means tolerant of other people and open to new ideas, I consider “liberal” to be a badge of honor. ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2004, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/9 "2004-08-09T12:14:03Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > Liberal is not a naughty word That certainly depends on whom you call liberal (in the American usage, in Danish it means Libertarian). I know a few who’d rather be called spawn of Satan than liberal. On the other hand it seems to me you have no problem using conservative as a naughty word. ---
**Author:** ![BMalion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e274bd/32.png) [@BMalion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BMalion)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2004, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/10 "2004-08-09T13:27:24Z")
[Melchett] “Security” isn’t a dirty word, Blackadder. “Crevice” is a dirty word, but “security” isn’t. [/Melchett] ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2004, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/11 "2004-08-09T21:55:38Z")
> [@](#): > > That certainly depends on whom you call liberal Uh, doesn’t it depend more on what is meant by the _user_ of the term? “Liberal” is like “nerd”. Nerds are better students than others, but no one wants to be called that. ---
**Author:** ![Jon\_the\_Geek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/bbce88/32.png) [@Jon\_the\_Geek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jon_the_Geek)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2004, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/12 "2004-08-09T22:11:51Z")
> [@sqweels](#): > > Uh, doesn’t it depend more on what is meant by the _user_ of the term? > > “Liberal” is like “nerd”. Nerds are better students than others, but no one wants to be called that. I don’t have much to add to the discussion… but, as to the “no one wants to be called that” comment, are you sure? I mean, I _prefer_ “geek,” but “nerd” isn’t too terrible, either. 🙂 I don’t mind conservatives using “liberal” as a slur; heck, call me a liberal all you want, it won’t bother me a lick. But when the people in the middle (and even some on the left) start accepting that calling someone “liberal” is the same as saying there’s something wrong with them, then that’s just messed up. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2004, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/13 "2004-08-09T22:41:45Z")
You need to convince the American people of that, not me. Ask yourself a few things here…why won’t Kerry come out and say he’s a ‘liberal’? Because he really is a centrist? The majority of his past policies haven’t been centrist, he’s certainly a left leaning politician on most matters…by American standards anyway. Is he using European standards, or is he perhaps afraid to be branded a ‘liberal’? Afaik, even Kucinich didn’t come right out and proudly display the fact he is a liberal. Why is that? Liberals have a bad name because their over all agenda/image isn’t popular in the US for a variety of reasons…part of which is the majority of American’s hover closer to the center (albiet our own center). I know Brain Glutton doesn’t agree with me on this, but I think that the majority of American’s are basically centrists, leaning left on some issues, right on others. ‘Liberals’ have been associated with the left wing and are not an over all centrist political philosophy…much like Conservatives aren’t really a centrist political philosophy. However Conservatives have really gone out of their way to modify SOME of their stances to APPEAR to be centrist…or at least to appeal to the center. Well, at least they were on that road before Bush anyway… So, why aren’t Conservatives demonized like Liberals are? Good question with a complex answer. For one thing I think the Conservative message strikes a cord with Americans somewhat, while much of the Liberal message has fallen a bit on deaf ears (I’m talking about over all, population wise in the US). While certainly some of the Liberal message is appealing (even to this centrist :)), over all I don’t think there is much of a ‘market’ for their message in the US. The majority of the reason though is the fact that Concervatives of the old school were generally successful in associating Liberal with Socialist…and making a connection between Socialist and Communist. Part of that is the fact that there is some similarities between agendas (albiet a pretty tenuous link IMO). Communism, especially after the spectacular way it bombed world wide, has never been very popular with the majority of Americans, so even a tenuous association is like the kiss of death to the majority of Americans. Another thing has been the perception that Liberals haven’t managed well when in power. Look at the presidents generally reguarded as ‘Liberals’…Presidents like Carter and Johnson. Then look at presidents (generally) reguarded as centrist like Clinton and Kennedy (I’m using Democrat examples obviously) and you get a strong contrast as far as the PERCEPTION by the American people of who had successful administrations, and who bombed big time. I know that some would argue with my examples (Liberals would argue Carter wasn’t REALLY a Liberal, Conservatives would argue Clinton was no Centrist), but I think this is the over all perception of these folks by the majority of Americans. At any rate, thats the reality…in America left leaning politicians don’t want to be associated or labled as a ‘liberal’. They want to be associated as centrists as that appeals more to Americans. -XT ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2004, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/14 "2004-08-09T23:40:39Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > Ask yourself a few things here…why won’t Kerry come out and say he’s a ‘liberal’? Because the Republican Party in general (and Newt Gingrich in particular) have already polluted the word. > [@xtisme](#): > > So, why aren’t Conservatives demonized like Liberals are? Because they control the media. Rush Limbaugh would sooner gnaw off his own leg before he uses “conservative” as a derogatory term on his show. You can make up whatever nonsense theories you like about which philosophies are more popular with folks, but the simple fact is that the conservative noise machine is the one that dominates American political discourse – and being in charge brings with it a variety of perks, not the least of which is to make certain terms as derogatory or laudable as you want them to be. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2004, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/15 "2004-08-09T23:46:05Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > Because they [conservatives] control the media. So, it’s not the Jews afterall… Can we get a cite for your claim? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2004, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/16 "2004-08-09T23:46:20Z")
I hate to bust your bubble rjung (well, ok…I love doing it) but ‘liberal’ has been a ‘bad word’ in the US for a bit longer than this administration. In fact, it was a ‘bad word’ long before even Clinton was in office. Unless its your contention that the Conservative media (lol) has been in control of the country for a long time now (i.e. for at least a decade, perhaps longer)? This ‘conservatives control the media’ nonsense is no better than the other side railing at the ‘liberal controlled media’ rjung. Its just as tired and knee jerk of a response. -XT ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2004, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/17 "2004-08-10T01:31:05Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > To many people, liberal = big government, but you won’t find that in the dictionary. And most Democrats know that. Hence it’s only the rare Democract who is a self-described liberal. I’m a registered Democrat, but I usually describe myself as a socialist (even though I’m no Marxist and am really more of a social democrat by European standards), in order to **distinguish** myself from the liberals, defined as those for whom a bit more government spending and more progressive taxes, etc., would be enough, and who would be satisfied to leave our economic system, class system, and the distribution of wealth and power in our society substantially as they are now. But we’ve already had several threads on the difference between a liberal and a leftist or socialist, and also about the meaning of “progressive.” (See Wikipedia excerpt above.) ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2004, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/18 "2004-08-10T06:31:53Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > Can we get a cite for your claim? [Start here.](http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/cool/giants/) > [@xtisme](#): > > I hate to bust your bubble rjung (well, ok…I love doing it) but ‘liberal’ has been a ‘bad word’ in the US for a bit longer than this administration. In fact, it was a ‘bad word’ long before even Clinton was in office. Unless its your contention that the Conservative media (lol) has been in control of the country for a long time now (i.e. for at least a decade, perhaps longer)? Considering that Ronald Reagan managed to get the [Fairness Doctrine repealed in 1987,](http://www.sustainer.org/dhm_archive/search.php?display_article=vn209fairnessed) I agree with you completely. ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2004, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/19 "2004-08-10T15:30:23Z")
**Jon the Geek** : > [@](#): > > I don’t have much to add to the discussion… but, as to the “no one wants to be called that” comment, are you sure? I mean, I prefer “geek,” but “nerd” isn’t too terrible, either. You’re right so far as it goes, but my comparison still stands in that “nerd” and “liberal” are epithets use by bullies–young and old–to embarass and intimidate people who really are better than they are. **Xtisme** : I disagree with your analysis. If “liberals” are disliked, I don’t think it’s the result of a thorough analysis of their positions. Liberal positions are often complex and evolve, so they don’t fit into sound bites. To say, “the trouble with liberals is that they are left-leaning” is meaningless except to draw associations with communism. Conservatives pull out all the stops in distorting liberal positions and portraying them as extreme. If this is the only thing people have to go on when forming an impression, and liberals themselves can’t get a word in edgewise, what do you expect? It’s all about bullying and the Big Lie. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2004, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950/20 "2004-08-10T15:39:22Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > [Start here.](http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/cool/giants/) You’re kidding, right? That’s your “proof” that conservatives control the media? Why not save yourself further embarassement and just retract the claim. It is simply not a provable assertion. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-is-not-a-naughty-word/258950.md?page=2)