Liberals and The Philosophy of Shampoo
I have to clarify what I mean by "liberals." I mean people who lean towards leftist tendencies -- not classical liberals. Originally from my blog WindUpRubberFinger 06/07/11
We're surrounded by philosophy everyday. Shampoo bottles even espouse philosophy. We are at a point in history where two competing philosophies are battling for control of this nation.
I don't think many people really have a problem understanding Conservative philosophy because it's so simple. The Conservative philosophy is one of personal responsibility and individual freedom. People are flawed and because of this we must have some form of government to protect individual rights.
The liberal philosophy (modern liberalism) is one that I don't quite understand. I'm beginning to think that my misunderstanding is rooted in the vagueness that is modern liberalism.
While trying to understand the liberal mindset I have noticed a few repeating trends. Again this is based on my own experience.
Liberals tend to defend things they don't fully understand. To me it's like people who will actually get in a heated argument over a sports team. Unless you are employed by that sports team, or make your living as a bookie, it's doubtful that the team's success or record will have an effect on you in real life.
Liberals don't know what they stand for. I have seen more liberals run from anything which could represent any sort of structured belief system, religious or not. It seems that liberals will categorize just about anything except themselves or their beliefs. I think it has to do with not wanting to be pinned down. If you stand for everything you stand for nothing.
Liberals often talk about how open-minded they are. If someone were truly open-minded they would never consider it. True character traits are most often not noticed by those who possess them.
Liberals often talk of self definition; a want to "find themselves". I don't understand this at all. I have never wanted to "find myself". How many experiences must someone be exposed to before they understand themselves? Why would you want to base your life on your limitations, in a few circumstances, at any given point in time. That's depressing.
Liberals think that nothing is black and white, but that there are solutions to every problem. It amazes me how many people I've talked to who say, "...someone will come along and fix it, they always do". Believing that someone will always correct things is dangerous. To believe that "someone will always fix it" means that you are putting your faith blindly in some unnamed person or persons to solve an issue. To follow man blindly means that you must believe man is naturally good, or naturally looks out for the best interest of others.
All of these traits are not necessarily negative, however; I would want none of them in a leader.
It seems to me that liberals are incapable of making most philosophical decisions as an individual. Liberals shun personal responsibility because someone else knows what's best, and will eventually come around and fix things for them. Perhaps that's why they are comfortable with someone else making the decisions for them.
When it comes to philosophy I would rather have a leader who believes that philosophical choices are individual choices -- not to be mandated. - JM
There's something deeply wrong with wanting others to provide for you; to take the fall for you. There's also something deeply wrong with those who want to control other people because of their reliance on others. There's something downright evil about teaching people to rely on others as a direct means of controlling them. - JM
One more thing to consider. The most notable modern historical Conservative philosophers are The Founding Fathers of the United States of America. The most notable modern historical leftist philosopher is Karl Heinrich Marx. Which of these philosophies have most contributed to improving the human condition?
Tell me what you think...
Buy me a Ko-Fi 😉👉
I was always wondering something similar but from a different perspective.
I completely agree that conservative philosophy is of personal responsibility and individual freedom
On the opposite end is the leftwing philosophy of sharing / socialism
However, when you make an aggregation on a population level of rightwing or leftwing individuals you always end up with the completely opposite countries in style?!?!
You would never think of a theocracy as a leftwing system? The epitome of "wanting others to provide for you; to take the fall for you"
The same is with monarchy where right of monarch sat proponents of the divine right to rule (backing the monarch and dichotomy of plebs vs nobles) and on the left sat liberals demanding the old system be dismantled and replaced with something new where citizens would have more say. Rightwing states usually support authoritarian systems, leftwing want everyone to participate on more equal footing.
On the origins or terms see youtube.com/watch?v=MYoA1R38cuc&t=92s
From my perspective, right wingers want personal responsibility but strangely immediately flock to the strongest leader that facilitates authoritarianism that often demands they surrender the personal freedoms ?!?. Even if the shepherd intends to eat them they follow...
Leftwingers want collectivism and resent authoritarianism that makes any system less likely to work. Their flock runs in so many different directions its impossible to direct towards the common good they want?!?! But end up in a democracy with all its flaws.
Ironically it is the leftwingers that demand individual freedoms in any authoritarian system while it is always the rightwingers that demand everyone conform to the majority and just follow what those above say. So this is actually completely different from what you conclude.
A must watch video is the TED talk https://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_haidt_the_moral_roots_of_liberals_and_conservatives
I cannot agree on your first point that liberals defend things they dont understand since a lot of studies have linked educational attainment with liberal mindset. I find it the other way around where rightwing holdouts usually claim the world is flat, medicine doenst work, supreme leader knows best about tarifs... etc without understanding of the science behind.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2016/09/15/educational-divide-in-vote-preferences-on-track-to-be-wider-than-in-recent-elections/
For the second point i agree that there is no fixed belief system in liberals. They care not about religion, country, etc... they care about fairness and stopping particular belief systems from divesting people from their liberties (again ironically)
for the point 4. you can never know enough. Claiming that one understand all precludes growth and i find that to be a flaw in conservatives. Only in the past one can remain unchanging. Dont forget that meme which says "Tradition is peer pressure from dead people". Often rightly suggesting that the world did change since the guys died.
"To follow man blindly means that you must believe man is naturally good, or naturally looks out for the best interest of others" isnt this exactly what the right did in the last election? Rightwingers blindly voted for a known cheater (both in law sense and in marriage) that literally harmed their interests by giving even more power to oligarchy the last time he was in charge (and this time as well...shocking...right?). And oligarchs do not have the best interest of the citizens in mind
"Liberals shun personal responsibility because someone else knows what's best" this is completely wrong since liberals everywhere will immediately rise against any despot (king, ayatolah, governer, dear leader) who demands blind obedience without justification.
Rightwingers usually have no spine to call them out. Barring few like Adam Kinzinger
Re your last comment: Ironically the direct descendant of Marxist doctrine (Communism) is Russia. Dont tell me you see Putin as a leftwinger? (defenestrating political opponents, nationalistic fervor, oligarchy, prohibiting gays, gulags)
Europe is socialistic (leftwing). and as i said before it outperforms USA on humanistic values like education, healthcare, expected lifespan, sick leave, vacation days and other trappings of the civilized world...
Like Denmark, Sweeden, Estonia, Norway, Switzerland, New Zealand, Ireland....
"Most conservative" states (rightwing) on the other hand are North Korea.... Afganistan...China... Saudi Arabia... Russia
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/most-conservative-countries
now tell me again with the straight face "Which of these philosophies have most contributed to improving the human condition". If you had to move would you try to go to Denmark (and make it more like Russia) or would you aim for North Korea (Russia if GDP is better) as your paradise?
While this fully explains why both lines of thought are neccessary, it doesnt really say why