I was having an argument with a co-worker the other day. It went something like this:
Co-worker: I believe that countries with socialist governments are better off.
Me: A reasonable thesis, what are your metrics? (I proceed to pull up the HDI by the UN)
Co-worker: Well, there are really liberal countries like Norway -
Me: Wait, don't say 'liberal.' Socialism isn't liberal.
CW: Sure it is.
Me: No, socialism might be a leftist ideology, but it sure as hell isn't liberal.
CW: What do you mean?
Me: Well, countries with socialist governments typically have to tax more, which isn't a liberal idea, and a lot of the time they also have to engage in protectionism.
CW: That is being liberal...
So, the conversation diverged and we both decided that the office wasn't a great place to have a political discussion, but I thought I might bring it up here. The left has some great ideas, and I understand why a lot of people get the two confused. But make no mistake, Liberalism is not Leftism.
I've had this discussion with Scott, who, for all his merits, is a Leftist. Liberalism I believe can best be currently summarized by the primary tenet of individuals rights. For this reason, I think we can generalize the Constitution as a liberal document, as (at least the way I have interpreted it) that was its primary focus. Many of the founding fathers did also agree with me verbally on this.
Here are some things that I see as being leftist but not liberal:
• Regulations on Free Trade
• Government Mandatory Union Laws
• Social Security
to name a paltry few. I'm not anti-Union, you might note, and I don't think of myself as a perfect liberal. I do like to think that I try to think about individual's rights when I decide if an idea is worth supporting though...
And what better time to discuss all this than on the heels of one of the most leftist idea's I've seen in a long time. Obama thinks it's a good idea to require high school and college students to work a minimum amount of hours in community service. Hearing this idea made me cringe. America needs a socialist president right now. With the economic recession around the corner and the effects looming, public works are going to be the lifeblood of the country in the coming years. That said, it sickens me to hear that he proposes what is essentially a draft. America was built on the individual's drive for merit. The individual must be given a choice to succeed or fail. Obviously it's not that cut and dry, but the idea is a relative one. To take advantage of the environment and brain that you have been given by 'god' (because I still don't know how we select what body we're put into) or to accept the status quo and allow ones self to be consumed by mere existence. I don't believe humans are destined for any particular situation, but I think the path is clear. Upwards and onwards, so to speak.
No, I will not engage in any nihilistic arguments.
I think the timing of this is doubly interesting as Amanda just posted on Ayn Rand. I think Rand can espouse the individual bullshit I've been talking about here way better than I, and likewise Nietzsche over Rand.
Anyways, discuss further in the comments. I'd like to know what you guys think of all this, especially since I happen to know we're all at least marginally Obama supporters.
Oh, and for the record, I think I'm currently closest to Libertarian.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
So should we just let poor people starve?
Sorry for the deleted comment. Fuck "Preview."
I think comparing mandatory public service to the draft is a bit hasty. No one is requiring anyone to give his/her life to defend a country against its current (and in all likelihood temporary) enemies. I don't think having middle schoolers clean up a park for an hour a week is so dramatic. To clarify, according to that link you posted, Obama wants to "set a goal" that middle- and high-schoolers will do 50 hours a week, and he wants to create incentives for others to serve. Don't get me wrong, I'm not championing his policy; requiring this sort of work makes me uncomfortable, but I'm not sure that's what would happen.
I had no idea that Liberalism and Leftism weren't the same thing. Given the crash course I've had from their wikipedia pages, I would side with Liberalism. I'm not all that into -isms, if you want to know the truth. Okay, okay, except for feminism.
I think in principle, a system based on merit is the most just. I'm just not as sure about reality. No one exists in a vacuum. We should not suppose that as the world exists now, merit is the only criterion for success. Or for failure. Some doors are not open to some people for reasons unrelated to merit. We have be cognizant of our own merit and privilege that constitute our achievement.
Incidentally, I deleted my Rand post, Dave. I wrote and posted it hastily, in a fit of passion. It is on my computer, but I want to keep reading and writing as I go. I am still not halfway through, despite reading literally the entire day. Don't worry; I'll probably write an essay. :)
Newcomer: I'm not suggesting that socialism doesn't have it's place. I personally think that for the time period that we're going to find ourselves in in the next decade or so might do well to have someone at least aware of the merits of socialism. But, to make the distinction clear, I don't believe in forced ANYTHING. Social Security I believe has its place. In planning your retirement? In planning FOR anyone? Average people shouldn't [have to]* rely on the government for monetary assistance or managing one's own checkbook. So, to answer your question, no, I don't think that poor people should starve, but it's not my purpose in life to pay into some guys='s retirement fund.
ALM: It's forced. BY THE GOVERNMENT. That's the point here - that the government doesn't have any place mandating that kids in school - a state-mandated institution, should then be mandated BY THAT SAME STATE to perform some service for them.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I'm just scared where this could lead.
That said, because I think of college considerably different - that the current university system is in dire need of more federal assistance, and that it's considerably more of a luxury good in the rudimentary sense. When I heard that I would have to engage in psychology experiments from grad students, I took it as a cool thing to engage in, and part of the 'experience' so to speak.
I had a hard time completing my hours, but that's more of me being a slacker than anything important here.
In response to your discussion of a merit-based society, I agree for the most part. It's not a perfect system, but it's getting better and it depends on what we do as people in our generation that matters. It's cheesy, I know, but we really do have to fight the good fight. I do think that capitalism is the solution though. That's an entirely other discussion though...
Liberalism versus leftism - The left likes to take one or two ideas and steal names. Just recently random leftists starting calling themselves progressive. Do you remember who?
Hillary Clinton. Of the two Democratic potentials throught he nominee, are you going to tell me that Hillary Clinton is the "progressive" one?
I get you on the 'ism' issue though. Unfortunately we're only capable of communicating via language, so we're going to have to compromise to some extent.
Finally, you shouldn't delete stuff. ALL of this is experimental, I think we all understand that. I'm sure I've made my mistakes on my posts. HELL, maybe that wasn't actually a giant vagina? Who really knows.
Dave, I agree that community service being required by the government is shady. That's how we punish criminals. I just meant that when I read that blurb on that link, it didn't really say anywhere that that would happen. I interpret "setting a goal" not as "required by government." I'm not saying it won't happen, and if it does, I'll be right there with you...I just didn't interpret the same thing the same way. Unless you have another source. In which case, share with the rest of the class. I didn't do any research about it.
Post a Comment