Understanding the Liberal Mindset

[The Great Zaganza]

I think we are getting signals mixed.

We are living in a time of deep insecurity, which makes people yearn for "Strong Leadership" while at the same time being deeply suspicious of Political Power in general.
I don't think it takes much to push people from authoritarians to anarchism and back, depending on how affected they think they are by the issues.

And this is completely divorced from Right/Left politics.

 

[steenkh]

If you go far enough left, then yes, of course.

And as the horseshoe theory tells us, the extreme left easily embraces rightist authoritarianism too. I just read a history of Denmark in the 1920'es where a well-known communist, and feminist icon switched allegiance to (one of) the Nazi parties.

 

[jimbob]

And as the horseshoe theory tells us, the extreme left easily embraces rightist authoritarianism too. I just read a history of Denmark in the 1920'es where a well-known communist, and feminist icon switched allegiance to (one of) the Nazi parties.

Exactly.

Because such extreme ideologies attract people with black and white thinking. The simplicity of the answer is more attractive than the actual answer.

 

[steenkh]

Because such extreme ideologies attract people with black and white thinking. The simplicity of the answer is more attractive than the actual answer.

Many people would welcome an authoritarian system who only did good, i.e. implemented exactly the policy that they would want themselves. This might trample over some minor opinions, but who cares? Collateral damage and all that.

I also don't think this is a right/left issue.

 

[acbytesla]

Right, so a lot of leftists seem to like the idea of leftist authoritarianism.

I certainly don't. But it amazes me just how similar in practice extremist right wing governments are to extreme left wing governments.

 

[acbytesla]

Many people would welcome an authoritarian system who only did good, i.e. implemented exactly the policy that they would want themselves. This might trample over some minor opinions, but who cares? Collateral damage and all that.
I also don't think this is a right/left issue.

This is exactly what Machavelli wrote about in The Prince. That ideally the best government is one that is dictatorial. But was wise and did the right thing. Dictatorships are efficient. Democracies are not.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

of course a Philosopher King will get more done than a parliament - that is not the question.

The question is - what happens when someone new wants to be King.

Democracy is The Best (not just the least worst) because it can credibly create a modicum of stability for Generations, not just until the current ruler gets old and week. Peaceful transition of power is everything.
Investments require planning horizons of the order of decades, not years or months.

Only long-term stability can create intergenerational wealth.

 

[acbytesla]

of course a Philosopher King will get more done than a parliament - that is not the question.

The question is - what happens when someone new wants to be King.

Democracy is The Best (not just the least worst) because it can credibly create a modicum of stability for Generations, not just until the current ruler gets old and week. Peaceful transition of power is everything.
Investments require planning horizons of the order of decades, not years or months.

Only long-term stability can
create intergenerational wealth.

I have a question. Is that necessarily a good thing?

 

[The Great Zaganza]

I have a question. Is that necessarily a good thing?

Given the number of people who tend to be kill in conflicts - I would generally say yes.

 

[acbytesla]

Given the number of people who tend to be kill in conflicts - I would generally say yes.

Yeah, but is it a good thing you should have power over me because of daddy?

 

[The Great Zaganza]

I think you misunderstood me completely.

Hereditary rule does not provide multigenerational stability - there is always upheaval during transition.

Only Democracy can do that, and only as long as people feel that, eventually, their side will be in power for a while.

More fundamentally, every System needs to regularly or continuously reduce wealth inequality - either through taxation or war.

 

[acbytesla]

I think you misunderstood me completely.

Hereditary rule does not provide multigenerational stability - there is always upheaval during transition.

Only Democracy can do that, and only as long as people feel that, eventually, their side will be in power for a while.

I think you misunderstand what I'm saying. Intergenerational wealth and stability in itself is a form of hereditary rule. Wealth is power. He with the most money rules.

 

[jimbob]

I have a question. Is that necessarily a good thing?

A certain amount of intergenerational wealth is probably advantageous for economic growth as longer term investments are possible.

The classic (and increasingly rare) examples would be small family firms or farms.

How one allows (or even defines) what is a reasonable amount is another question.

 

[acbytesla]

A certain amount of intergenerational wealth is probably advantageous for economic growth as longer term investments are possible.

The classic (and increasingly rare) examples would be small family firms or farms.

How one allows (or even defines) what is a reasonable amount is another question.

We have a turd of a leader because of intergenerational wealth. Don't we?

 

[jimbob]

We have a turd of a leader because of intergenerational wealth. Don't we?

Yup. That is "too much". But something like, say a mom and pop family store or restaurant, they are more likely to be happy investing in that if they think their children could take it over

 

[acbytesla]

Yup. That is "too much". But something like, say a mom and pop family store or restaurant, they are more likely to be happy investing in that if they think their children could take it over

Totally true.

But that doesn't mean the children are capable and should take over the family business. For every story about a business that successfully passed on from one generation to the next, there is the story of children ruining it.

One of the best arguments for inheritance taxes is that it breaks up business dynasties. New blood is required.

 

[Emily's Cat]

If you go far enough left, then yes, of course. But not most socialists, let alone liberals.

And I would question how many those actually are. And the proportion of those on the left who are authoritarians is probably pretty small, especially in the US compared to, say, right wing authoritarians in the US. Or even right wing authoritarians who are in government in the US.

I dunno. How many US members do we have here who support communism? How many in the citizenry, and how much influence do you think they have on the Democratic party?

Few doesn't mean powerless. And I think there's a lot more out there - especially among reckless and naive college students and academics.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I think we are getting signals mixed.

We are living in a time of deep insecurity, which makes people yearn for "Strong Leadership" while at the same time being deeply suspicious of Political Power in general.
I don't think it takes much to push people from authoritarians to anarchism and back, depending on how affected they think they are by the issues.

And this is completely divorced from Right/Left politics.

I think most people - and by most I would speculate somewhere around 90% - would be really happy if out governments would just consistently apply the current laws in a reasonable way. If we could just get that one basic foundation shored up, all the rest can be discussed.

 

[Emily's Cat]

This is exactly what Machavelli wrote about in The Prince. That ideally the best government is one that is dictatorial. But was wise and did the right thing. Dictatorships are efficient. Democracies are not.

It's something that doesn't sit well with most anyone in a liberal democracy... but historically, monarchies have been fairly effective. Not necessarily for every single person, and when they go wrong they go really really wrong. But most monarchs throughout the ages took their roles quite seriously and did a decent job of it.

I still don't want monarchs to make a resurgence.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I have a question. Is that necessarily a good thing?

I assume you're asking about intergenerational wealth?

Generally, yes, it's a good thing. Being able to have surplus enough to provide a safety net for your children, which allows them to have a surplus for their children, and so on is a good thing. Being able to hand down property and assets to your children is a good thing. Ideally, everyone should have some.

I'd much rather focus on allowing everyone the opportunity to generate that wealth than trying to punish people who already have it.