Illiberalism and the Postmodern Left
By Rick Adamson
7.18.18
© 2017 Rick Adamson 2018
I recently read “The Closing of the Liberal Mind” by Kim Holmes. Dr. Holmes attempts to explain how and why Liberals and Conservatives think so differently about government and civil society. In certain instances he does this using philosophical terms and references many philosophers which is above my level of expertise but I found it interesting and helpful in trying to understand current thinking in the country.
He attributes much of our current thinking to the Enlightenment which was a period where European politics, philosophy, science, religion and communications were radically reoriented during the course of the “long 18th century” (1685-1815). Enlightenment thinkers in Britain, in France and throughout Europe questioned traditional authority (Kings and the Catholic Church) and embraced the notion that humanity could be improved through rational thought and change. The American and French Revolutions were directly inspired by Enlightenment ideals.
“The French Revolution failed, argues Schama, because it tried to create the impossible: a regime both of liberty and of … state power. The history of the revolution is proof that these goals are incompatible. The American Revolution succeeded because it chose one, liberty. The Russian Revolution became deranged when it chose the other, state power. The French Revolution, to its credit and sorrow, wanted both. Its great virtue was to have loosed the idea of liberty upon Europe. Its great vice was to have created the model, the monster, of the mobilized militarized state…” Krauthammer, Charles (2013-10-22). Things That Matter: Three Decades of Passions, Pastimes and Politics (p. 134).
The French approach deteriorated into Socialism then morphed into Marxism and Communism and the revolutions in Russia, China, Cuba and Vietnam, among others. In all cases the independent “civil” institutions (Church, schools, family, community organizations) that lie between the state and the people in the U.S., were eliminated and replaced by the Government (the “State”). Note, I reluctantly listed schools as they have effectively been nationalized in the U.S., and, of course, there is a great battle raging against religion in America.
It seems that the major issues are the difference in thinking about the role of the State and of human nature. Some on the left believe that humans have inherent capabilities to be good people and that through rational thought they can create utopia. Some on the right believe that human behavior requires moderation which is best accomplished through independent “civil” institutions. The latter was the basis of the American Revolution; the former was the basis of the French revolution.
I would just ask; if humans, through rational thought alone, could create utopia, why has it never happened? And if it is true that human behavior requires moderation and there are no independent “civic” institutions who/what is to be done? Answer: State control, totalitarianism/autocracy.
Now, I do believe most people want fairness and equal opportunity for all. They believe in a safety net for the truly needed. But they do not believe that Socialism is the way to get it. They believe that such an approach would ultimately deteriorate into a State which exercises unbridled power, as it always has (which is further evidence that human society benefits from / requires civility (some moderating influence) in order to get along and improve everyone’s position.
Currently, the Postmodern Left (a fusion of very old ideas from radical egalitarianism with very new notions of culture and morality) has replaced the progressive liberals of yesteryear (i.e., Clinton, Johnson and Roosevelt, et.al.). These folks mostly focus on cultural issues whereas there is an economic faction which is not much different (Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren).
"They are Humanists which is an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. Humanist beliefs stress the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasize common human needs, and seek solely rational ways of solving human problems."...LeMay, Michael D.. The Death of Christian Thought: The Deception of Humanism and How to Protect Yourself (Kindle Locations 19-23). Aneko Press. Kindle Edition.
"They are Humanists which is an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. Humanist beliefs stress the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasize common human needs, and seek solely rational ways of solving human problems."...LeMay, Michael D.. The Death of Christian Thought: The Deception of Humanism and How to Protect Yourself (Kindle Locations 19-23). Aneko Press. Kindle Edition.
A postmodernist, according to Dr. Holmes, “is someone who believes that ethics are completely and utterly relative, and that human knowledge is, quite simply, whatever the individual, society, or political powers say it is.”
“Professors Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont describe it this way: a fascination with obscure discourses; an epistemic relativism linked to a generalized skepticism toward modern science; an excessive interest in subjective beliefs independently of their truth or falsity; and an emphasis on discourse and language as opposed to the facts to which those discourses refer (or, worse, the rejection of the very idea that facts exist or that one may refer to them).” Holmes, Kim R. (2017-12-12). The Closing of the Liberal Mind: How Groupthink and Intolerance Define the Left (p. 38).
They are saying that Postmodernists practice a form of illiberalism which emphasizes identity politics, victimology and a K-16 educational system that privileges self-esteem and dignity over knowledge and wisdom. Their illiberalism undercuts rational discourse replacing reason and logic with ‘feelings’, ‘emotions’, and the denial of all traditional truth claims. They think the state must be endowed with unlimited powers to create this new order, and the rights of the individual must be radically sacrificed for the greater good. Where once freedom of speech and expression were sacrosanct, today illiberalism employs speech codes, trigger warnings, boycotts, and shaming rituals to stifle freedom of thought, expression, and action. It is a set of ideas in politics, government, and popular culture that increasingly reflects authoritarian and even anti-democratic values, and which is devising new strategies of exclusiveness to eliminate certain ideas and people from the political process. As an example, here is an extract from “It's Time to Fight Dirty: How Democrats Can Build a Lasting Majority in American Politics” by David Faris.
Dr. Holmes adds: “To wit, how a society is ordered culturally is as much a political question as deciding what kind of government is best for the people. The results are a cornucopia of identity theories promising perfect diversity. All adversity, even that which is biologically inherited, can be wiped away by simply adjusting one’s attitudes.”
I wonder just how the attitudes of such a diverse society can be adjusted absent a State that demands it, under threat of punishment, or one that controls all information and knowledge? (Oh, North Korea just came to mind!)
Not to mention the fact that our Constitution does not allow our government to involve itself in such social matters, even though it does; especially the Courts.
Keep in mind that our founders were liberals, that is, classic liberals as they believed in liberty and freedom. However, they wanted a general government limited to the defense of those principles as opposed to the one they rebelled against. They never expected the general government to be involved in managing civil matters or social welfare programs; that was left to the independent civil institutions. This pretty much explains the other side.
And That’s that!
