The Myth of Live-and-Let-Live  Liberalism
By _Jonah Goldberg_ 
(http://www.realclearpolitics.com/authors/jonah_goldberg/)  - September 14,  
2013 


http://www.realclearpolitics.com
 
 Washington, D.C., the city’s department of health wants to subject  people 
seeking a tattoo or body piercing to a mandatory 24-hour waiting period  
before they can go through with it. That’s just one of the regulations in a  
66-page proposal of new rules for the tattoo and piercing industry.
 
Reasonable people may differ on the wisdom of these proposals, but as 
someone  whose interest in such establishments begins and ends with keeping my 
daughter  away from them, I can’t get too worked up either way, save to say 
D.C. has  bigger problems to worry about



What did catch my eye was this line from the write-up in the metro section 
of  the Washington Post: “The body art rules are the latest product of a 
city  government that has occasionally struggled to reconcile its socially 
liberal  sensibilities with a zeal for regulation.” 
As a conservative resident of Washington, D.C., where registered  
Republicans are outnumbered by about 9 to 1 and where truly conservative  
Republicans 
are outnumbered on a scale comparable to the predicament faced by  Frodo 
and Sam when they sneaked into orc-infested Mordor, I find such statements  
hilarious. 
There is a notion out there that being “socially liberal” means you’re a  
libertarian at heart, a live-and-let-live sort of person who says “whatever  
floats your boat” a lot. 
Alleged proof for this amusing myth (or pernicious lie; take your pick) 
comes  in the form of liberal support for gay marriage and abortion rights, and 
 opposition to a few things that smack of what some people call “
traditional  values.” 
The evidence disproving this adorable story of live-and-let-live liberalism 
 comes in the form of pretty much everything else liberals say, do, and  
believe. 
Social liberalism is the foremost, predominant, and in many instances sole  
impulse for zealous regulation in this country, particularly in big cities. 
I  love it when liberals complain about a ridiculous bit of PC 
nanny-statism coming  out of New York, L.A., Chicago, D.C., Seattle, etc. — 
“What will 
they do  next?” 
Uh, sorry to tell you, but you are “they.” Outside of a Law and Order 
script  — or an equally implausible MSNBC diatribe about who ruined Detroit —  
conservatives have as much influence on big-city liberalism as the Knights 
of  Malta do. 
Seriously, who else do people think are behind efforts to ban big sodas or  
sue hairdressers for charging women more than men? Who harasses little kids 
for  making toy guns out of sticks, Pop Tarts, or their own fingers? Who 
wants to  regulate the air you breathe, the food you eat, and the beverages 
you drink? Who  wants to control your thermostat? Take your guns? Your 
cigarettes? Heck, your  candy cigarettes? Who’s in favor of speech codes on 
campuses and “hate crime”  laws everywhere? Who’s in favor of free speech when 
it 
comes to  taxpayer-subsidized “art” and pornography (so long as you use a 
condom, if  liberals get their way) but then bang their spoons on their high 
chairs for  strict regulations when it comes to political speech? Who loves 
meddling,  finger-wagging billionaires like Michael Bloomberg when they use 
state power and  taxpayer money to herd, bully, and nudge people but thinks 
billionaires like the  Koch brothers who want to shrink government are the 
root of all tyranny? 
At the national level, who bypassed Congress to empower the EPA to regulate 
 the atmosphere? Oh, and who pushed Obamacare on a country that didn’t want 
it?  Who defends bending the entire country — including religious 
institutions — into  a national health-care scheme dedicated to the proposition 
of 
live and let live  so long as you live the way the Department of Health and 
Human Services says you  should? 
Did legislative and bureaucratic gremlins sneak into government buildings 
at  night and pass all of these rules and regulations while the 
social-liberal  free-thinkers were off not judging people and refusing to harsh 
anybody’s 
 mellow? 
Sure, today’s liberalism does carry within it some genetic lineage to the  
classical liberalism — i.e., libertarianism — of J. S. Mill and John Locke. 
But  genetic ties are overrated. After all, humans share half of our genes 
with  bananas. (Look it up.) 
Social liberalism — better understood as progressivism — is a worldview  
that seeks to use the state to support its preferred values and culture. That 
 isn’t libertarianism. Support for abortion rights does not make you a  
libertarian; it makes you someone who wants very lax regulations on abortion for
  ideological reasons. Which is why socially liberal bureaucrats in D.C. 
want to  make you wait 24 hours to get a tattoo of a baby on your arm, but 
there’s no  waiting to have an  abortion. 


-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to