You don't know what a pseudo-liberal is?


Well - if someone claims to be liberal, but their actions belie only lip service to the cause of individual liberty; while actually advancing some other agenda, such as Supremacy of the State, or Socialism, or any other ism inimical to individual liberty; then how could their liberalism be real. Hence it is false, or pseudo-liberalism. They are not really liberal at all.


I would ascribe pseudo-liberalism to any politician who actually is saying and doing as I have described above; many if not most of whom claim to be liberal, all the while tightening the noose around personal freedoms and free choice unanswerable to anyone else.

Actually, we should not use that word at all to describe them. But they claim that word "liberal", as they have the word "progressive", both of which were counterfeits of previous political movements with better reputations than the subtle variant of socialism which they really seem to be.


Finally, take note of the vast difference in ideology in the likes of James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Henry David Thoreau, Alexander Voltaire and numerous others; with most of those who now claim the title "Liberal". The former group was liberal, referring to a fundamental belief in individual liberty under law.

But the current claimants bear no resemblance at all to the real liberals of the past, which some now call "Classical Liberalism" The promoting and enacting of numerous socialist solutions for every problem at hand and state enforced mandates over private matters, belies their so-called liberalism. Worse yet is that subset which supports the total supremacy of the State, brushing aside all notions of personal liberty, even including repeatedly advocating the re-distribution of property without compensation (Obama 2008 - from his mouth to my ear over the air). Well, they call themselves liberal, but they couldn't possibly be.