When I was in school, I learned that the term 'liberal' could refer to two groups of people: those newfangled progressives and economic libertarians (so-called "classical liberals"). And the more I considered the term 'liberal,' the more I realized that it was an incorrect way to describe leftists.
The root word of 'liberal' is 'liberty'--which progressives seek to squealch. In the guise of protecting one's liberty to "choose" whether or not to have a child, progressives end an unborn child's liberty to simply exist. When seeking to protect the liberty of minorities to enjoy equal opportunities, progressives kill a businessowner's liberty to choose his or her employees and clientele. In trying to preserve one's 'liberty,' to access universal health care, progressives enslave us all with oppressive taxation.
Frankly, even the word 'progressive' is misleading. 'Progress,' according to the dictionary, means 'improvement,' 'growth,' and 'development.' Yet, blithely stating that leftists engender progress assumes precisely what leftists need to prove to our predominately center-right country. Instead, the term 'statist' seems the most accurate and uncontroversial. No matter who is doing the interpreting, leftists resort to state intervention as a solution to most of life's alleged problems.
That is, when they can't resort to the thesaurus. The New York Times reports that terms like 'global warming,' 'cap and trade,' and 'energy efficiency' are passe. Worse yet, the terms "turn[] people off, fostering images of shaggy-haired liberals, economic sacrifice and complex scientific dispute[s]." In fact, these terms foster images that are entirely correct--minus my above quibble with the term 'liberal.'
Yet, according to a leaked e-mail, statists, in their desire to cause economic sacrifice and elevate "shaggy-haired" statists to positions of power, see fit to use different terminology.
Instead of grim warnings about global warming, the firm advises, talk about "our deteriorating atmosphere." Drop discussions of carbon dioxide and bring up "moving away from the dirty fuels of the past." Don't confuse people with cap and trade; use terms like "cap and cash back"or "pollution reduction refund."
Indeed--when the world appears less and less to be warming, let's talk about something else. When people realize that radical carbon dioxide emission cuts are counterproductive and economically unfeasible (unless we go for nuclear energy, and who other than me wants that?), by all means, let's vaguely discuss "dirty fuel" and amorphously blame "the past."
When people realize that 'cap and trade' is an incredibly bad idea that would effectively tax the working class, let's phrase it in terms of 'cash back' and 'refunds'--how could those hurt the economy? Just as liberals co-opted the term 'liberty,' and 'progress,' so they attempt to obfuscate the true issues by misusing language yet again.
Don't be fooled. If statism were such a great idea, statists would have no reason to make up controversial and confusing terminology to describe themselves and their ideas.