A commonly repeated idea is that we need to defend ourselves from people who want to force their way of life onto us. Maybe this idea should be used to judge every political move in society.
For example, nobody should be discriminated against because they are clean living (I've heard of that), or because they campaign for family values (I have experienced that myself). But then, nobody should have the right to prevent government from recognising same sex marriage when it's none of their business.
Modern conservative movements seek to blur the line here. They claim they are persecuted - which may be true in some sectors. But what they can campaign for is adequate protection of their way of life, not turning the clock back to 1950 so we all have to live their way of life. The former seeks to grant churches the right not to perform gay marriages, for example, and the latter seeks to prevent government from recognising any gay marriage. This example illustrates the difference very clearly.
TaraElla Fanclub
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Fair Protection for Everyone
Society should recognise that every disadvantaged minority needs fair protection, or otherwise we would have tyranny of the majority. That's why I am totally supportive of all anti-discrimination laws and efforts out there, for example.
Many traditionalists are skeptical that this kind of protection is good. But many of them don't realise that they are a real minority now either - and they need protection too. For example, I have copped lots of abuse for promoting my traditionalist ideas of stable family and clean living. Many traditionalists simply blame the rest of the world, but this is not going to change things. Instead, they should realise that they too have become victims of tyranny of the majority, and should stand with us to change this.
Fair protection should be available for everyone, traditionalists or otherwise - and others who live by mix-and-match approaches. Therefore we need both marriage equality and availability of non-marital type partnerships with the same rights. It is for the same reason that we need both public decency laws and privacy rights. It is for the same reason that we need covenant relationship registration along with full rights for cohabiting couples. That's why I speak out for solutions to protect every group in society from every perspective, against the tyranny of majority.
Many traditionalists are skeptical that this kind of protection is good. But many of them don't realise that they are a real minority now either - and they need protection too. For example, I have copped lots of abuse for promoting my traditionalist ideas of stable family and clean living. Many traditionalists simply blame the rest of the world, but this is not going to change things. Instead, they should realise that they too have become victims of tyranny of the majority, and should stand with us to change this.
Fair protection should be available for everyone, traditionalists or otherwise - and others who live by mix-and-match approaches. Therefore we need both marriage equality and availability of non-marital type partnerships with the same rights. It is for the same reason that we need both public decency laws and privacy rights. It is for the same reason that we need covenant relationship registration along with full rights for cohabiting couples. That's why I speak out for solutions to protect every group in society from every perspective, against the tyranny of majority.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
It's from my Own Experience
Some people may not agree with me about the need to specifically cater to protecting traditionalist lifestyles to get traditionalists on board the liberal movement. Others may silently agree with this idea, but fear stepping on the many radical feminist and radical social engineering idealists toes if they speak up. But I have taken this cause to my heart, because it comes from my very own experience.
I do idealise a traditionalist life to a certain extent. A stable family, a relationship that lasts forever, and maintaining connections with historical traditions are all important goals in my own life. In fact, when I was young, I was scared away from liberalism by the seeming disregard of liberal intellectuals for these things. It was only when I concluded that liberal equals freedom equals freedom for me to do my thing that I was convinced it was the right side to join. And to this day, my support for liberalism is on the condition that it allows every lifestyle (that does not harm others') to thrive, not only those of particular favoured groups.
Many traditionalists still don't realise this, I guess. They fear liberalism will spell the end of their traditionalist life. We need to alleviate this fear for them.
I do idealise a traditionalist life to a certain extent. A stable family, a relationship that lasts forever, and maintaining connections with historical traditions are all important goals in my own life. In fact, when I was young, I was scared away from liberalism by the seeming disregard of liberal intellectuals for these things. It was only when I concluded that liberal equals freedom equals freedom for me to do my thing that I was convinced it was the right side to join. And to this day, my support for liberalism is on the condition that it allows every lifestyle (that does not harm others') to thrive, not only those of particular favoured groups.
Many traditionalists still don't realise this, I guess. They fear liberalism will spell the end of their traditionalist life. We need to alleviate this fear for them.
The Real Fix for Reactionarism
It seems that nowadays there are more and more reactionary people around. You really can't disagree that extreme ideologies like racism are on the rise. Having done a lot of study in why this is the case, I have come to the conclusion that the way the world has changed recently has been too much for many people.
And indeed it has. First of all, 1980s style Thatcherist economics are stupid and a complete return to Keynesian economic policies are in order. The economic miracle of the 1950s West was based on Keynesianism - when you are onto a good thing, you don't let it go easily. Sadly, the recession in the 1970s became an excuse to try out extremist, anti-human type policies. People have suffered too much because of the rise of the economic right, and I believe it is the responsibility of the major centre-left parties of the world to take us back onto the right track. A return to a pre-80s model of economics with no ifs, ands or buts is not radical, it is pro-human.
Secondly, I believe the right to live a traditionalist moral life has been eroded. Hence a lot of traditionalists have decided to wage war on all things progressive - which I believe is misguided, but sadly we must face the fact that this is happening. You see, us traditionalists really don't appreciate the in-your-face sexualisation of society, the putting down of the clean living ideal, the blaring of vulgar hip-hop music everywhere you go, and pressure applied against families that wish to be stable. Responding to us by calling us conservative (even I have been called that a few times!) and upping the action is not really going to help - we will not convert to the hippie agenda unfortunately. Obviously the multi-million dollar media business has its role here, and they should be our main target, but what we can do is to reaffirm the right of everyone not to be offended by oversexualisation and the lack of respect in society.
I am a social libertarian and I believe in freedom. Hence I support extending anti-discrimination to polyamorists (even if I don't agree with their lifestyle), and the decriminalisation of abortion by legislation (Roe vs Wade needs to be overturned because it is improper in and of itself, but whilst I am pro-life I do believe in the state not interfering in matters so personal) for example. But to help people like me make the case for these amendments in the wider world to make your life easier, you have to give us, the traditionalist majority, some respect too. Shoving it in our face doesn't help.
And indeed it has. First of all, 1980s style Thatcherist economics are stupid and a complete return to Keynesian economic policies are in order. The economic miracle of the 1950s West was based on Keynesianism - when you are onto a good thing, you don't let it go easily. Sadly, the recession in the 1970s became an excuse to try out extremist, anti-human type policies. People have suffered too much because of the rise of the economic right, and I believe it is the responsibility of the major centre-left parties of the world to take us back onto the right track. A return to a pre-80s model of economics with no ifs, ands or buts is not radical, it is pro-human.
Secondly, I believe the right to live a traditionalist moral life has been eroded. Hence a lot of traditionalists have decided to wage war on all things progressive - which I believe is misguided, but sadly we must face the fact that this is happening. You see, us traditionalists really don't appreciate the in-your-face sexualisation of society, the putting down of the clean living ideal, the blaring of vulgar hip-hop music everywhere you go, and pressure applied against families that wish to be stable. Responding to us by calling us conservative (even I have been called that a few times!) and upping the action is not really going to help - we will not convert to the hippie agenda unfortunately. Obviously the multi-million dollar media business has its role here, and they should be our main target, but what we can do is to reaffirm the right of everyone not to be offended by oversexualisation and the lack of respect in society.
I am a social libertarian and I believe in freedom. Hence I support extending anti-discrimination to polyamorists (even if I don't agree with their lifestyle), and the decriminalisation of abortion by legislation (Roe vs Wade needs to be overturned because it is improper in and of itself, but whilst I am pro-life I do believe in the state not interfering in matters so personal) for example. But to help people like me make the case for these amendments in the wider world to make your life easier, you have to give us, the traditionalist majority, some respect too. Shoving it in our face doesn't help.
Freedom Above All Else!
The number one thing we should be aiming for and defending in a democracy is freedom. No freedom, no democracy, fascism etc. can rise up easily.
Forget about electing an efficient government, if the choice is between freedom and lack thereof. This includes not just economic freedom but also the freedom to believe and live as you believe. We must stand up for that freedom, at any cost.
There are many lifestyles out there that I don't agree with. But then, when it comes to governance, freedom comes first, and I stand by others' rights to live as they believe without difficulty.
Forget about electing an efficient government, if the choice is between freedom and lack thereof. This includes not just economic freedom but also the freedom to believe and live as you believe. We must stand up for that freedom, at any cost.
There are many lifestyles out there that I don't agree with. But then, when it comes to governance, freedom comes first, and I stand by others' rights to live as they believe without difficulty.
Competition Isn't Necessarily Good
In this market driven world we are often told that competition is always good. Which is something that I find ridiculous.
Consider this. Worker A would be able to do a certain job for $10 an hour. Now worker B comes along and offers $5 an hour. Worker A, though demanding a wage that is not unreasonable at all, will still be priced out of the market and left jobless. Now imagine a whole nation of people surviving on $5 an hour jobs, and all the social implications. Would you like to live in that nation?
Now consider this. Worker B continues to work on their job for $5 an hour, but worker C comes along and offers to do the same job for the same price, and is willing to be humiliated and yelled upon every day for no good reason and will return this with only praise to their boss. Guess who gets the job then? As you can see, it is not only a matter of economics, it is also a matter of equality in human dignity.
Consider this. Worker A would be able to do a certain job for $10 an hour. Now worker B comes along and offers $5 an hour. Worker A, though demanding a wage that is not unreasonable at all, will still be priced out of the market and left jobless. Now imagine a whole nation of people surviving on $5 an hour jobs, and all the social implications. Would you like to live in that nation?
Now consider this. Worker B continues to work on their job for $5 an hour, but worker C comes along and offers to do the same job for the same price, and is willing to be humiliated and yelled upon every day for no good reason and will return this with only praise to their boss. Guess who gets the job then? As you can see, it is not only a matter of economics, it is also a matter of equality in human dignity.
A New Approach to Government Employment
The government should try to employ every single unemployed person in the nation. This is what I believe.
This is not as hard to do as it seems. In most advanced countries the government already has a welfare system to look after the unemployed. The government can pay the welfare benefits as a wage and ask for work for them in return. This is important because while it is natural for private employers to look for what they see most fit to help them profit, it is the government's role in society to correct market failure, including to help those that private enterprise do not find useful.
This will also free up more talent for the private sector to choose from, which is also good for free enterprise.
This is not as hard to do as it seems. In most advanced countries the government already has a welfare system to look after the unemployed. The government can pay the welfare benefits as a wage and ask for work for them in return. This is important because while it is natural for private employers to look for what they see most fit to help them profit, it is the government's role in society to correct market failure, including to help those that private enterprise do not find useful.
This will also free up more talent for the private sector to choose from, which is also good for free enterprise.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
