Skip to main content

How Liberalism leads to Socialism

Liberalism doesn't work because it presumes people are equal/born equal when they are not (e.g. average African IQ is well below that of East Asians). Given the false premise that people are equal, the only concern of Liberalism is merit and equality of opportunity. Given equal effort and training in a particular role, two individuals should achieve equal financial outcomes: this often is not the case due largely to differences in individuals. e.g. one person may be more assertive or have more self-esteem, despite their work outcomes being the same as another, and therefore ask for and negotiate a pay rise -- either with the same employer, or a new one. If a man achieves the pay rise, rather than the female who didn't ask for one, the female may falsely assume some sort of discrimination or oppression, when it is only their more agreeable/less aggressive nature to blame. Socialism arose because it assumed Liberalism's false premises and attributed the disparity of outcomes to system flaws (oppression, class conflict, etc.) rather than disparities between individuals (intelligence, socialisation, assertiveness, ethics, aggressiveness due to testosterone, etc.). In summary: people are not equal. To the extent that Liberalism maintains the false equality premise, rather than recognise non-effort-related individual differences as a significant factor in different outcomes (e.g. IQ, aggressiveness), it will continue to breed resentment and Socialism.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Multiculturalism is responsible for every war in history (almost)

people informally segregate all the time. You will find various ethnic enclaves in Melbourne and Sydney. Ethnocentric in-group preference is also seen in choice of friends and communication levels among work colleagues of different ethnic backgrounds. While there may be enough tolerance to allow semi-deracinated individuals to participate in capitalism and consumerism, the reality is that in-group preference is innate and Multiculturalism/diversity should be avoided a much as possible, because it breaks down social cohesion and trust. Diversity is our greatest weakness - an observable, scientific reality (footnote: Robert Putnam). Remember that forced integration has lead to many conflicts in the 20th and 21st century. WWI and Hitler would not have happened if various ethnic groups had sovereignty rather than being under the thumb of oppressive empires. Iraq and Israel/Palestine are two current examples of Multicultural conflicts. There is widespread revolt against forced integrati...

How Liberalism enslaves

Aristotle, the Stoics and other ancient Greco-Roman moralists posit a very different idea of 'freedom' that involves combating the tendencies that divert us from human flourishing and contributing to our community as social animals. It is naturalistic, albeit pre-Darwinist, but it is not dogmatic like Liberalism, Leftism, etc. This ancient teach us what freedom really is, and Stoic practices in particular can inculcate an honest sense of autonomy. Liberalism claims to grant people autonomy but it only gives them a false sense of it. It effectively enslaves people to denial of their biology, hedonistic consumerism, keeping up with the Jones', seeking celebrity, lower quality social and family relations, workplace and other forms of alienation, pursuit of happiness in all the wrong places: career, travel, shiny things, sleeping around, taking drugs, etc. Liberalism won't necessarily lead to all these things, but it makes people vulnerable to their marketing, and being h...

Equality, Liberalism and the Big State

Shelley makes Liberalism sounds as idealistic and Utopian as any religion. I even see some parallels with the Sermon on the Mount. What is the relation between 'equality' and the 'individual'. (I don't think we are equal and my reification of the 'individual' has become weaker lately). Must one have a strong view of equality to have a strong view of the individual and their 'rights'? I think so, although those regimes pushing equality the strongest - the Communists - have ended up being the most hierarchical and totalitarian of all, with the State on top and the plebs below. Equality ends ups sacrificing individual 'rights' for the sake of whatever new set of individual 'rights' are trendy at the time. e.g. we need to pretend that homosexual relationships are equal to heterosexual ones therefore our 'free speech' right is sacrificed so as to protect the new 'freedom from hurt feelings' right of another. New indiv...