Reply #15: "liberals have shunned dogma" -- not true [View All]

Never forget that Martin Luther King and many of the other civil rights movement leaders were devout religious leaders.

Far from shunning dogma, we suffer from a multiplicity of inconsistent dogmas. One of the strengths of the ascendent conservativism is that its adherents select from a "menu" of apparently non-contradictory positions to arrive at their own individual dogmatic stance, presenting a seemingly unified front.

Liberals, on the other hand... we are in constant internal conflict. Do we restrict firearms ownership for the probable public good, or preserve the most liberating interpretation of the 2nd amendment? Do we support increased involvment of the federal government in local affairs, or increased involvment of local government in federal affairs? Do we support Social Security as a successful public insurance program, or oppose FICA's regressive tax burden? Do we support private property ownership rights, or embrace the ideal of worker-owned means of production? Do we support civil rights for everyone, or only for those who purport to support civil rights for everyone? The answer offered by the overall body of Liberals to these questions has typically been "all of the above."

Insofar as we have no consistent dogma, additional dogmatic liberals will only reinforce this overall inconsistency. Where the current crop of neo-conservatives achieve strength through lockstep unification of a multifaceted single vision, we oppose ourselves on every front.