What Liberalism Means

 

A Locke unpicked.

It is a scandal that most people today, and certainly most young people have no idea what liberalism is all about. Despite the fact that it is the philosophy on which the U.S.A. is founded. I think it is fair to say that it is also the philosophy on which the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, or New Zealand is founded. It is what unites us. Whereas most nations are united by ethnicity, we are historically united instead by our shared embrace of this philosophy. Accordingly, it is disastrous, almost traitorous, not to make it the core of our educational system.

Here is a quick primer for the uninformed. 

First, a list of some of its key figures, with a bit of a Canadian bias: John Locke, Thomas Jefferson, Robert Baldwin, Lord Acton, Wilfred Laurier, William Wilberforce, William Gladstone, Daniel O'Connell, John Stuart Mill, Martin Luther King Jr.. With a hat tip to such older thinkers as Thomas Aquinas, Ibn Khaldun, and the New Testament.

The most famous and succinct statement is in the American Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

This is Jefferson’s take on Locke; I think Locke’s formulation is better. I paraphrase:

“We hold these truths to be sacred and inviolable, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the possession of Property.”

Human equality and human rights are not self-evident—that is false in philosophical terms. Locke derives this from the Bible. It is an article of the Judeo-Christian faith. Forgetting this has had disastrous consequences, and may lead to worse in future. Nevertheless, it is God’s truth. Given that God loves us all as his children, we are all equal in moral worth, and due respect. Other religions and philosophies do not necessarily agree. Hinduism has the different castes emerging from different parts of Purusha’s body—the manual labourers from his feet. Shintoism has the emperor a direct descendant of the sun; an entirely different class of being from mere mortals. Roman Emperors were worshipped as gods. I’ve seen Mao Zedong worshipped as a god in temples in China.

And Jefferson wrongly swapped out “property” for the meaningless “pursuit of happiness.” Pursuit of happiness is included in the right to liberty; and it is a vain pursuit. “Property” means we have a moral right to the products of our labour. That is a critical right, often currently dishonoured.

Another crucial document is John Stuart Mill’s explanation of freedom of speech, in “On Liberty.” 

Other helpful quotes: 

Lord Acton: “Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

MLK: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

The modern Marxist left seems to work against all of these principles. And it is the modern Marxist left that has seized control of our educational system.

The abolition of slavery, for example, was the great liberal project of the nineteenth century. The modern left ultimately endorses slavery, at least in principle, for they expand compulsion whenever possible. Historically, more completely articulated Marxism has led to the reimposition of slavery in states like Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Kampuchea, or China today. 

The modern left also opposes human equality, giving special rights to one group over another. This has become mass genocide when pushed to its logical conclusion in places like Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, China, or Kampuchea. 

The modern left opposes freedom of speech, freedom of association, and even the right to life.

To be clear, if we lose our shared commitment to liberal values, the US collapses into civil war; as does Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the UK. We are seeing this happen.

The Jefferson - Hemings Scandal

Hmm. The politically correct fix may not be easy.

When I was a schoolboy, most everybody thought Thomas Jefferson was one of the greats. Me included. Jefferson is now rather in eclipse. I read from a recent visitor that the guides at Monticello now spend most of their time talking about how badly the slaves had it on his estate, rather than anything flattering about that slavemaster Jefferson. I have even seen the suggestion recently that the Jefferson Memorial ought to be pulled down.

Why this reputational turnaround?

Sure, Jefferson owned slaves. We were perfectly aware of that back in my school days. Yes, it was a stain upon his character, but it was already factored in. Washington owned slaves too. So did Ben Franklin or John Hancock. Yet Washington, Hancock, or Franklin are not facing the same re-evaluation Jefferson is.

No, the new thing, which has made so much difference in the popular appraisal of Jefferson, is Sally Hemings.

You have heard the story? Hemings was Jefferson’s slave. It is now, thanks to DNA evidence acquired in the 1990s, generally accepted that Jefferson took her as his common law wife after he was widowed, and had several children by her.

Why is this so intolerable? One would think we were past condemning misogyny. Is white on black love still forbidden? Or would it be okay if it were a black man and a white woman?

Ah, but no doubt it is because she was a slave. Power differential and all that. Like a predatory boss hitting on a pretty secretary—as used to be a common romantic motif, but is now considered intolerable. She was a slave. That means it was all involuntary on her part. That means it was really rape. Worse, he was a white man raping a black woman. If irate African-Americans were not already going to exhume him just to lynch him, the feminists would.

A few points. First, it is all just rumor.

Although it is commonly stated as fact, the claim that Jefferson took Hemings as a mistress is not, in fact, proven. The DNA test proved that some male in the Jefferson line was the father of one of Hemings’ children—descendants of her other children were not tested. But there were dozens of male Jeffersons in the neighborhood of Monticello at the time. Why assume it was Thomas? We assume it was perhaps only because that makes the most salacious story. Really, the odds it was him are only about one in twenty-five. No jury would convict.

Sally Hemings as portrayed today.

Interestingly, given the ire of African-Americans over it all, Hemings also was not black. She was three-quarters European by blood, and apparently looked, according to contemporaries, white. Not at all how she is commonly portrayed now. Her children are listed in censuses as “white.”

Finally, there is a problem with the claim that it was all forced upon her. Yes, she was a slave. But in the end, she was actually a slave by choice. if Jefferson was an oppressive slave master, or an unwelcome suitor, Hemings had a perfect opportunity to escape.

Here’s how. Sally accompanied Jefferson’s daughter to Paris when her master was appointed US Ambassador to France. While they were there, the French government abolished slavery. And, yes, this also applied to the slaves of foreign diplomats—Jefferson apparently had to start paying her regular wages.

At this point, as a practical matter, all she had to do was walk out the front door, and she was free forever. And she had been studying French.

Sally Hemings as portrayed today.

She chose instead, at the end of his tenure, to return with her employer to America, and become again his slave.

He cannot have been all that terrible to work for.