Attacks on Liberalism

Liberalism with its principles of free inquiry and discourse, individual liberty, tolerance, economic freedom, reliance on reason and science,  and strict limits on the state has always had its enemies.  The hard leftists have never accepted its ideas.  Their objectives have always been authoritarian or totalitarian. However in this country with the exception of overt communists, they usually have tended to dissemble their real desires.  The Catholic Church historically condemned and opposed liberalism, though less in America than in Europe and less in the years after World War II than before.  Advocates of  tribalism whether in the form of populist nationalism , racial identity politics,  or both (as in the case of the Nazis) have generally been antagonistic to liberal ideas  - though again more carefully and less overtly in America than in some other places.  

The 20^th Century provided such obvious examples of the dangers and failures of illiberal attitudes and politics and the success and benefits of liberal ones  that  around the turn of the millennium many thought the point had been made so clearly that the controversies were effectively over. Almost two decades later we can see that was completely wrong.

In the United States leftist authoritarians are behaving more boldly and having more success at colleges and universities than at any time since at least the 1970s.  Beyond the campuses it is now commonplace for leftists to oppose free speech and claim the First Amendment does not apply to expressions of opinions or ideas they dislike.  Socialism, or at least a vaguely imagined something  (often a fascist something) resembling it, is now so popular among some people that one might think that  the 20^th Century never happened or that present day examples such as Cuba, Venezuela, and North Korea do not exist.

While  the Catholic church never completely abandoned its hostility to liberalism, attacks whether  from the pope, other clergy, or  the laity  seem more common and less hedged than one would have seen a few years ago. The political opinions of the present pope are well known.  There is a lively discussion at present among some Catholic writers over whether the entire liberal enterprise of the last two hundred and fifty years was a mistake, and whether it is time for the church to abandon any pretense of getting along with it and return vigorously to its forthrightly authoritarian past. In an extreme example one can read about a  serious, contemporary  debate among  priests and other Catholics over whether kidnapping Jewish children someone had  baptized without the knowledge of  their parents  - as a pope did as recently as in the 19^th Century -  was and is a proper or even necessary practice.  None of this says anything about   any particular American Catholic,  but it is there.

The tribalism in American politics seems to be getting worse.   Donald Trump based much of his campaign for the nomination of his party on a populist appeal blaming foreigners, competition from foreigners, and immigration by foreigners for much of what was wrong in the country. It worked well enough to help him get the nomination over several more qualified  and experienced opponents. (I think it mattered less in the general election where there were many differences between the candidates in policies and desires and where he faced a very unlikable opponent.)   On the other side Democrats have increased the amount of their crude  identity politicking  with its resentment based,  populist appeals to black and Hispanic Americans, Muslims  and various others with whom they think it might work.  

There is a cliché about sharks being drawn to blood in water.  It seems that a lot of liberalism’s various enemies think they are smelling blood these days.  That makes it a particularly good time for people to stand up for it.