Rebecca Deans-Rowe posted 28 Most Iconic Feminist Moments of 2013 on her Facebook page.

When I got to 10. Sarah Slamen’s Badass Takedown of Anti-Choice Texas Republicans Went Viral, I just had to post this one.

This is for someone I know who would just as soon disown her Texas heritage.

Naked Capitalism has the article Gaius Publius: `Liberalism Doesn`t Carry the Critique of Capitalism that Progressivism Does`.

I’ve been fascinated lately with the meaning of the terms “liberal” and “progressive.” It’s clear that what we now call “liberalism” is really a variant, a side branch of the real thing, and should be more properly named “FDR liberalism” or “social liberalism.” Today’s “liberalism” — FDR-liberalism — is an offshoot of pre-FDR liberalism that diverges from its original meaning in a rather important way, by including a role for government. Prior to FDR, “liberalism” just meant basic free-market capitalism.

That’s why so-called modern (Clintonian) “neoliberals” are so different from FDR liberals, and why they’re so similar to Milton Friedman free-market conservatives.

That last sentence really piqued my interest.  The rest of the article and the links provided are really great.  One of those links is to a podcast at Virtually Speaking.

I am reading the book “Death of the Liberal Class” by Chris Hedges. It is very interesting to compare the discussion in the Virtually Speaking podcast with what is in the book. I think the two complement each other and fill in some of the holes in each presentation. Hedges highlights the evil intent during the run up to WW I and afterwards a little bit more than the discussion in the Virtually Speaking podcast.

Reading the book, the Naked Capitalism blog post, and listening to the podcast helps me clarify my own views and where they come from.

I guess I am truly liberal in ways that I did not understand before. I do believe that big government is not desirable except for the fact that it needs to be big enough to reign in big capitalism. Of course there is also a role for making the investments in society that no other entity can make but (big) government.

In general, I believe that big concentrations of power are dangerous, but I do not subscribe to the naivete of libertarians that if one side disarms, all will just turn out peachy. When the power of one side gets too large compared to the power of the other side, then their needs to be an effort to rebalance. I don’t know how to avoid the inevitable ratcheting up of concentrated powers balancing against each other that merely rebalancing seems to achieve.