The Long-Awaited Schism
Why True Liberals must Divorce themselves from the Tribal, Dogmatic and Intolerant side of the Left.
I want to open with this conceptually simple (yet perhaps practically complex) proposition:
“There is arguably nothing — no philosophical truth, no human virtue, no moral issue, no matter of race, gender, or culture, no matter of human oppression, imbalance or injustice - echoed by the cries of the dogmatic Left, that cannot be better understood, discussed and acted upon by non-dogmatic, scientifically literate reasoning grounded in genuine compassion, love, and the recognition of individual worth.”
Do we really need dogmatic ideology and groupish tribalism to express and articulate liberal values? Please show me one thing that rigid or radical Leftist ideology has to offer that cannot be arrived at and expressed through the medium of freethought, scientific reason, human compassion, and genuine empathy. Show me any truth or observation about human dignity — or an idea to make the world a better place - that requires me to anchor my identity to that of the Left. Why not simply follow moral and scientific principles, and strive hard to live a worthy life in service to honor, integrity, love, compassion, physical and moral courage, intellectual and personal honesty, selfless service, and respect for fellow human beings?
In short, my lifetime love and immersion in both science and the US military has perhaps left me with an increasingly puzzled state — and stale, bitter taste — in regards to our societies’ vapid obsession with ideology and political tribalism as the best means to serve human problems and enrich the clarity of our moral compass. Why is reason and scientific thinking so downplayed in such a disturbingly large segment of social activism and politics, while Enlightenment values and virtues are trampled on by the boot of our loudest partisans and ideologues screaming from the echo chambers of both sides? Where is the space for reasonable discourse, along which people across the political spectrum can freely move and conversate? For a New Center (to quote people like Ali Rizvi, author of the newly released “The Atheist Muslim”) to emerge?
Thankfully, such a ‘new center’ is finally emerging (I’ve always used the term ‘the Third Voice’, but the overall idea remains the same). A central pillar of this movement is an attempt to compare and contrast true liberalism — and its bedrock Enlightenment values — with the attitudes and behavior exhibited by ‘regressives’ whose true colors often run contrary to these values, and in stunning ways.
To clarify, I am not singling out the Left without doing the same for the Right. I take on both, in my upcoming books and in my proposals, articles, podcasts and discussions. This is about moral and intellectual consistency, in how all sides can separate the good from the bad and the ugly within their own political-moral Idea Tribe. When we really examine some of the attitudes and true colors often expressed by the extremists, dogmatists, identity tribalists and ideologues on both the Left and the Right, it shines an illuminating light of wonderful clarification, one which tends to expose the stunning distance between these corners of Identity Tribalism and the more open, skeptical people within both sides who reject these platitudes of idiocy within their own movements. The distance between rigid ideologues and non-ideologues within both sides, and the shared ‘common ground’ and overlap in values between open-minded, reasonable people on both sides, is what essentially comprises the basis for a new movement.
In service to this idea, let me issue a sobering challenge.
In short, my “Reason Challenge” to the Left (and I have a similar one for the Right as well, on patriotism and any given conservative value worth having) is simply this: show me something — anything — that is worthwhile within Leftist movements that specifically requires one to be a ‘loyal Leftist’ or drink any one brand of ideological cool-aide. Show me something about truth, justice and human well-being that is better served by political tribalism or ideology than by reason, scientific thinking and genuine compassion for fellow human beings? I have little doubt that such examples are out there. But they are likely to be rare and painstakingly clever exceptions to the rule, and this should give serious pause to those who insist that leftist ideology as a prime vehicle for social activism.
I argue, with the utmost intellectual and moral sincerity, that scientific thinking, humility and reasoned compassion comprise a categorically better vehicle to recognize the dignity and welfare of the individual human being and to arrive at answers to questions of liberty, justice and social flourishing.
A Challenge of Self-Reflection for the Left
I also argue that much of the tribalism, dogmatism and rigid ideology within the Left runs against — sometimes in diametric and violent opposition to — true liberal values. before I run what will be (for many) a shocking comparison of these values lined up side by side with the above trends seen in much of the Left, I think it is necessary that we run through the basics of what classical liberal values are, and what our Enlightenment heritage has given us as a guide-rail for expressing them.
As you read this, think about the current state of social justice activism and the loudest, most vicious and divisive elements within the Left. And compare, line by line, with as much honesty as you can. Re-read multiple times if you must, and really reflect on this, over and over again, with any chance you get. It is a morally serious and intellectually pivotal issue.
What is True Liberalism?
In defining and unpacking a problem, it is important to have a starting point. An anchoring point for what we value, a frame of reference against which to define the problem. So, for these purposes, let’s begin by starting with concise understanding of what ‘True Liberalism’ (or Classical Liberal, aka Traditional Liberal) is, and what that entails. I am not the deciding moral and philosophical arbiter of Classical Liberalism, but I think a run-through of thoughts, writings, speeches, literature and philosophy from Socrates, Plato, Aristotle to Bacon, Hume, Lock, Rousseau, Montesquieu, Jefferson, Washington, Adams, Madison, Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, and countless others, all the way to famed dissidents and liberal thinkers like Alexander Solzhenitsyn or even the famed George Orwell would more or less corroborate my list below.
A synopsis of classical liberalism in the West-from which both traditional liberals as well as classic conservatives claim to draw their inspirations-will tend to converge on the principles and values outline in this list.
True Liberalism, as classically defined, and as continually defended by leading thinkers today, has the following traits and values at its core:
On free expression
Freedom of speech, of thought, of conscious
A firm rejection of censorship, and the slippery slope it leads to
“I may despise what you have to say, but I will die defending it” — Free speech at all costs!
On Authoritarianism
No group should censor free speech, nor pressure people to remain silent
Speech codes are Orwellian — they can become systems of control
Enforced groupthink is a system of control — we must fight back
Targeting ‘heretics’ and dissenters ‘within the ranks’ is authoritarian
Don’t use bullying or attacks to control the narrative or define the parameters of the debate — this is authoritarian and dishonest
Social coercion to elicit conformity is authoritarian
Soft authoritarianism is still authoritarian and anti-liberal
On Tolerance
Don’t get me started. I’m not even going to fill this one in for fear of wasting hours of my time. Entire books have been written on this double standard.* There is a certain breed of self-described ‘tolerant’ Leftists who are intolerant to the core, and most everyone knows it, on both sides. Them included.
On Diversity and Pluralism
A plurality of ideas, a diversity of voices
A firm rejection of groupthink, and a celebration of individual thinking
On Non-conformity
A celebration of non-conformity
An encouragement of everyone to ask questions, buck the system
Individual thinking is good, Groupthink is dangerous — end of story
On Individuality
A celebration of individuality
A celebration of individual dissent, protest, and going against the group
On Moral Evolution, Satire, and openness to criticism
No idea is above criticism, not even our own
Question everything, hold nothing above scrutiny
Satire and speech are the best weapons
Ideas do not have rights; people do!
Openness to self-reflection, and a willingness to be wrong
The desire to morally evolve, and to always improve, be it an entire society, or ourselves as a whole
On Free Thought over Dogma
A firm rejection of dogmatism over free thought
To strive for new moral horizons, and to never remain rigid or clung to tradition or culture
On Identity Politics, Tribalism
A rejection of tribalism — striving for ‘Oneness’ and ‘Unity’ beyond tribe
A rejection of identity politics
An embracing of human flourishing, beyond borders
We are all in this fight, together (“Imagine”…)
A Rejection of Simplistic Thinking, and the Embrace of Complexity
A rejection of simpleton binary thinking
The embracing of complexity and nuanced argument
On Science and Free Inquiry
A respect for science and free inquiry, at all costs — dogma and social correctness should never trump these virtues
The ability to question orthodoxies is the heart of science and progress
On Socratic discourse and the value of Logic in Arguments
Debate and discuss via classic liberal and Enlightenment traditions
Socratic discussion, logic, and reason are the roots of our civilization and moral progress
Intellectual Honesty
Arguments, and claims about things and people, hold the burden of proof
Intellectual honesty is among prime virtues
Skepticism in making claims and accusations, and in believing claims and accusations
On the Individual
A recognition of the value and worth of the individual
The starting point for all talk of rights and injustice is the innate worth of the human person
Groups are made up of individuals — of people
Recognize the rights of the individual — don’t de-value individuals for the sake of ideology or slogans
On Human Rights and Freedoms
An embrace of the downtrodden, of victims of oppression, based on the value and worth of the human person
A recognition of the humanity and rights of all people — regardless of skin color, race, creed or gender
The universality of core human rights and freedoms
Freedom of conscience
Freedom of speech
Freedom of religion
Equality and Justice
Gender and women’s rights
Racial equality, across cultures and borders
Religious freedom and equality, across cultures and borders
My Challenge of Self-Reflection for the Left, restated
Take the time to look around you and notice the differences between the values and ideas expressed in the list above, and many of the trends within certain wings of the Left we see today. Be brutally honest with yourself. Before you get defensive or start pounding away at your keyboard for a rebuttal or reflexive “whatabout the Right” comment, take a moment of sobering self-reflection, and — please — have a closer look at some of these defining, core differences in values and ideas.
To drill a bit deeper, use this list, and then make your own list. Research the history and philosophy of our liberal traditions, and the traditions of open, honest discourse from Locke, Jefferson and John Stuart Mill all the way back to Socrates. Look at the core attributes and defining ‘moral terrain features’ of classical Liberalism and Enlightenment foundations upon which our most cherished liberal traditions are predicated, and the wellspring of good ideas from which much of our social, civil and moral progress has flourished — and from which our wondrous scientific knowledge has evolved — over the centuries and decades. Then compare these core features with many of the trends we see within the Left. I wont even describe the latter just yet — that is for future articles. For the moment, I’ll leave it to each individual reader to fill in those blanks themselves, as they read this article. But, in doing this, take a moment of brutal honesty and compare and contrast these values listed above with the reality you see on much of the Left. Do they tend to match? Or is there a split-off of values? If there is a split-off on some level, which side of it are you on? Why? At the bottom of these differences, what do you most cherish?
Take a moment — or as much time as you need, over long walks, montages in the gym or Roadhouse style Tai Chi workouts on the beach— and decide for yourself which of these conflicting sides you most value.
If you consider yourself a liberal, and especially if you are active in very liberal circles, perhaps ask yourself which value-sets best describes you. Then ask yourself — as sincerely as possible — how many of the values and ideals above are echoed or embodied by those around you. By sizable sections of your group and movement, and perhaps even by your movement as a whole. Be honest.
And most importantly — could you be wrong? Could there perhaps be a different viewpoint worth considering?
And, as a liberal — and as a human being - are you humble enough to consider it?
PART 2 of this Article to follow soon
Meanwhile, please check out the Freethought Proposal below.
