The definition of the word “liberal” has changed drastically in recent years. The original definition is a philosophy in which the primary emphasis is securing individual rights and freedom of the individual and limiting power of the government over individuals. The philosophy has been around for thousands of years, but gained traction and popularity during the industrial revolution in response to oppressive governments and corporations.

The original American liberal was Thomas Jefferson, a thinker, philosopher, and politician who helped create much of the US Constitution and is perhaps the most brilliant of our founding fathers. He realized from studying history that the bigger governments are, the more corrupt, oppressive, and totalitarian they are. Ours today is no exception. Kennedy once said that, “the greatest volume of sheer brainpower in one place occurred when Jefferson dined alone”.

In the 1960s and 70s in response to a growing federal government, the military draft, cold war, and Vietnam war, the Hippie movement was born, and similarly rejected the government and establishment and worked towards restoring individual freedoms and liberties for themselves, as well as for oppressed minorities, etc. They used more drugs and bathed as infrequently as the founding fathers, but philosophically they were very similar.

But during the last 30 years, the American liberal movement has turned 180 degrees and really represents socialism and totalitarian communism ideology. While this idea is dismissed out of hand by those on the far left that do not even like the label “liberal”, examination of their actions confirm that these liberals are correct about one thing: the term “liberal” is a gross misuse of the word to describe their philosophy.

The true “classic liberals” of today are exemplified by the libertarian party, specifically Ron Paul, and also by the Tea Party movement. Both these political ideologies are not “radical” or “extremist”, but actually embrace the original tenets of classic liberalism: individual rights and freedoms, limited government, and adhered to constitutional principles. It’s that simple. One sentence.

These “liberals” of today, as we call them, hardly believe in individual rights, limited government, or the rights of the individual trumping the rights of the state. Rather they are proud to proclaim their belief in the ideas of social justice, wealth redistribution, unbridled government spending and growth, government collection of personal information (health records, phone records and cell phone locations, e-mails, political affiliation, group membership, contacts, etc).  

Liberals adhere to political correctness, a cornerstone tenet of Cultural Marxism, and they subscribe to the notion that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few (ie: the state trumps individual rights).  They believe in socialized medicine (single payer, government controlled, and “socialized” is even in the name), and cradle to grave care and administration of the individual by the government. They abhor free speech, second amendment rights, rights of parents, rights of corporations, religious freedom, and the idea of economic capitalism.

They try to nationalize every industry: healthcare, auto, airlines, power, oil, banking, etc. They divide people into groups, create victim classes, promote envy, try to legislate economic and social morality, and demonize anybody with different philosophical viewpoints or opinions as “radicals” and “extremists”. (You may be audited by the IRS nowadays if you’re an enemy of the state.) The aforementioned are where the label “totalitarian” apply.

It takes minimal observation and analyses to realize that these philosophical principles are socialist totalitarian, and as has been noted by many in the past, “socialism is merely the road to communism”. If one subscribes to socialist principles, they shouldn’t try to disguise and hide it, be proud and drink the kool-aid out in the open for all to see. Let their ideals stand on their own merits if they can.

These socialists which we mislabel “liberals” or “progressives” have taken control of much of the democrat party in the United States. They intentionally promote their socialist beliefs as democrat principles in an effort to obfuscate their true intentions. Understandably they cannot realistically run for office and win as socialist or communist candidates, so they run as liberal democrats instead. It is interesting to note that both the CPUSA (Communist Party USA) and the Socialist Party USA did not put up presidential candidates during the past two presidential elections and both groups enthusiastically supported President Obama’s candidacy. They realize when their philosophies are being promoted as they wish. Obama even appointed “Czars”, his naming convention, to carry out his “fundamental change” to the US.

Here in Montana, the prevalent political affiliation is Democrat. Understandably with a large population of miners, loggers, farmers, ranchers, teachers, railroad workers, often unionized, Montana has a long democrat history from Jeanette Rankin to Mike Mansfield. But the average democrat in Montana is not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination. That’s why our last two governors have been democrats, and both our US Senators are democrats, yet Obama lost in both presidential elections by large margins. It’s not because democrats in Montana are racists, but rather because they are not socialist liberals and they can tell the difference between a democrat and a liberal (socialist). Examination of our governors and senators and their beliefs, votes, and actions shows them to be fairly conservative blue-dog democrats rather than socialists.

While liberalism has taken over the Democratic party and public offices in the big cities and on the coasts, the “flyover” states still have many traditional democrats who have much in common with today’s libertarians and republicans. They support such “radical” ideas like a flat rate income tax, a balanced budget, a strong military, belief in God, religious freedom, support for the First and Second Amendments to the Constitution, a secure border, strong work ethic, free markets, hand-up rather than handouts, States rights, existence of private property, limited federal government, restored individual and civil rights and liberties. All these are traditional Montana values shared by the vast majority of Montanans.

Outside of the spheres of “liberal” influence surrounding MSU in Bozeman and UM in Missoula, liberalism really has little in common with traditional Montana values, Republican or Democrat. But in the Bozeman area where some local media is infested with a sympathetic “liberal” socialist elitist staff members, one might not know that to be the case.