Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
Classical liberalism says a lot of things that are great in theory, but fail miserably in application.
|
It hasn't failed. It's responsible for the enormous gains in freedom and tolerance that we've seen since the Enlightenment. In every possible measure the world is more free and tolerant than it was 200 years ago, or 40 years ago. Why? And why has the West led the way and not Egypt, China, or Brazil?
Because of liberalism. Because of a culture that deliberately reduced the important of religion, of race, of gender. Protestants and Catholics used to be at each others' throats. Wars and oppression and bigotry. Why aren't they still at each others' throats? Because of liberal individualism. Because we said the most important thing about a person is their unique personal characteristics, not the fact they are Protestant or Catholic.
This what is missing in liberal education today - any recognition of the progress we've actually made. Steven Pinker's Better Angels of Our Nature provoked fierce criticism from the left for having the audacity to point out that the world - and especially the West - is getting less violent in every way. It's a surpassing irony that there's nobody today more reluctant to recognize progress than a progressive.
Liberalism works. History shows it works. Has it brought utopia? Nope. And no ideology ever will. Humans are flawed by their nature. All we can do is reduce our worst traits. As we have been for the last 100+ years.
On the other hand, there is no historical precedent for a sustainable society build on the premise of a power struggle between inborn identities. None. One identity will gain supremacy over the others and subordinate or snuff them out. And all the people who just want to be regarded as individuals - which is most people - will get caught up in the inferno.
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
You mean like when someone champions one particular flawed political philosophy, claiming it, and its followers, superior to others?
|
Liberalism means challenging everyone's beliefs, all the time. You don't get to say 'safe space' in a liberal society. You don't get to hide behind religion or your identity or your hurt feelings. It's all out on the table for everyone to question, challenge, poke, or reject.
But rejecting beliefs isn't the same as rejecting people. Play the ball, not the man. If you're too fragile to handle someone challenging your beliefs, then a liberal society isn't for you. A conservative, conformist, theocratic society is a better fit for those who don't like to be challenged. Who crave security. And I honestly believe that's the strongest appeal of the illiberal left credo today - like its mirror-image on the right, it offers emotional security and comfort. None of this tiresome need to reason and defend and challenge and compromise. No frustrating complexity or nuance. Just Right and Wrong. It's the new religion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
And I will repeat, that our society is not set up this way. We are a clash of cultures, ideologies and philosophies.
|
Liberalism
invites a clash of cultures, ideologies, and philosophies. It's a way to ask questions, not a fixed credo of answers. What it does insist on is:
- The most open arena of ideologies possible.
- The insistence that we hash them out using reason, and not tradition or sacredness or any other closed value.
- The recognition that all citizens have their own inherent worth that is not prescribed by gender, race, birth, etc.