In Defense of Liberalism

William Schneider perpetuates a myth when he blames past Democratic election defeats on liberalism (“Democrats: Nobody Here but Us Moderates,” Opinion, July 24). He concludes from this false premise that the Democrats have a good chance to capture the White House in 1988 only because they have finally moved away from those alleged failed liberal policies of yesteryear.

This is a narrow view that turns history on its head. Liberalism did not cause the Democratic Party to self-destruct. Quite the contrary, it was the Democratic Party’s timid retreat from its vigorous commitment to government programs that aided the poor and the middle class, and the extension of civil rights and civil liberties. A disastrous and costly policy of war and intervention in Vietnam and Southeast Asia further doomed the Democrats.

Lyndon B. Johnson did not fall from grace with the American people because they wanted him to keep the troops in Vietnam, but because they wanted them out. Even today, he is revered not because of his policy of militarism, but because of Medicare, Head Start, the Job Corp, voting rights, and dozens of other social measures his Administration made an accepted part of government, and today provide a better life for millions of Americans.

Time and again, the majority of Americans when polled have overwhelmingly voiced support for spending more on health, education and social services, and less on weapons.

If the Democrats fail in November it won’t be because they are too liberal. It will be because they failed to listen to an America that still demands peace and economic justice. This is “the cause” that liberals should still be proud to fight for. Liberals should not be afraid to be called liberals.

EARL HUTCHINSON

Inglewood