The evolution of things

Libertarians want a small government, where corporations have almost unlimited powers to do their business. Business and economic growth is the name of the game, and in fact, the only game in town. Unfortunately, along with that, they support reducing personal freedoms: the right to marry the same sex, abortion, privacy, surveillance etc.

On the other hand, the liberal lefties believe the opposite: they want more personal freedoms, and fewer corporate freedom.

Which one is the more “correct” or “best”?

Well, here’s the thing. Not one size fits all. It all depends on the level of consciousness found in the society at the moment. If this was still the old days, where people needed to build a new world and escape the medieval times, then libertarian conservatism makes more sense.

Think about it like this, as in an example: You just freed a Siberian village of some random mining slaves (ie the peasants of the medieval times). Do you just give them unlimited personal freedoms but not enough business-growth freedoms, or do you let them grow out of their slavery, in a way that they can prove to themselves that they can be free citizens that can contribute to the whole? In this case, the latter is a better option when taking into account the intellectual growth of these people *in the long term*. Newly freed people still need something to lean to in order to properly function until they grow out of it. This is the role of religion and nationalism that has played, and why restricted personal freedoms are still best for undeveloped intellects (and I’m metaphorically talking about the whole human race here).

In other words, the human race required this type of capitalistic right-leaning individualistic growth in the past, in order to prove to itself that it is a creator race that can stand on its own legs.

So there comes a time, where continuous business growth has its negative effects, to both society (e.g. shallow consumerism), and the environment. At the same time, the strictness of character found among conservatives, would need to be challenged in order to optimize and heal what we already built (and destroyed) in the last 200 years. Coming out of that phase is a sort of graduating.

That’s when social-democratic leftism (that is not communism or pure socialism, but rather left-leaning capitalism) can help.

The newly gained personal freedoms that liberalism/progressiveness calls for will create a new kind of more responsible citizen. One that does not require to “belong” in order to have an identity (as in the case of religion, or nationalism). While this personal transformation towards more personal freedom takes place, corporations would have to be restricted of absolute power simply because the humans that run them haven’t developed that sense of responsibility yet (they need to work for it first on personal level).

After another 200 years of leftism, and when personal responsibility has been tackled, a new kind of philosophy would be born yet again, to replace this type of social democracy. One with a smaller government, freer citizens AND freer corporations (that at the time might evolve themselves into “projects”, rather than plain business). Interestingly, that new order of things would be closer to left anarchism, than right wing libertanianism.

Basically, what I’m trying to say here is that everything evolves, and at each level of evolution, we have a set capacity of collective consciousness that reflects our economic and political system. So what I described above is simply one of the possible natural ways of society evolving away.

Change is inevitable. Flow with it, and you’ll be alright. Fear not fear.

5 Comments »

Vast_Majority wrote on March 5th, 2016 at 2:41 PM PST:

Unless I misread your opening paragraph, Libertarians in the U.S. DO support personal freedoms such as the right to marry the same sex and the right to have an abortion, etc.


This is the admin speaking...
Eugenia wrote on March 5th, 2016 at 3:22 PM PST:

Libertarians is not the same as liberals. In the US, libertarians usually vote for Republicans, not Democrats. So even if they’re not the kind of conservative block that are fueled by religion, they still vote Republican, who pass anti-liberty personal laws.


Vast_Majority wrote on March 5th, 2016 at 9:43 PM PST:

Actually all of the good Libertarians that I know do NOT vote Republican, they vote Libertarian. I’m sure you realize that there is a Libertarian party.


This is the admin speaking...
Eugenia wrote on March 5th, 2016 at 11:53 PM PST:

Yes, there is one. Just like there is a Green Party for the progressives. And yet, 99% of all of them vote either Republican or Democrat, which comes with a set of limitations.


William B Eggington wrote on March 14th, 2016 at 10:09 AM PST:

I have to back Vast_Majority on this one. Most libertarians since 2007 may have been Ron Paul supporters but in this election cycle I doubt you will see them supporting Republicans. Maybe some for Cruz. . . maybe some for Sanders. . . They will most likely vote for the Libertarian party candidate.

BTW your pro corporation thinking is totally incorrect. Most Libertarians believe that the only way a corporation can have a monopoly on a particular section of the market is THROUGH government. With a smaller government, corporations would no longer be able to dominate unless their product was somehow so vastly superior to competitors that no one else even tries to compete and in that case that would be a win for consumers.

For example, Comcast has monopolies all over the United States. They do so by working with local governments to ensure there are laws in place to protect their infrastructure from anyone competing through “no dig” laws. You literally can’t dig in someone’s yard without a costly permit applied one property at a time. ie. . . no one gets fiber from “Bob’s super fast internet”. You want internet? You need Comcast. End of story.

Think about it. If corporations themselves thought that Libertarian ideals were great, they’d support the Libertarian party or at least Libertarian candidates? Right? Nope. They back the authoritarians. The ones who fight to keep Cronyism in place. The opposite of Libertariansim.


Comments are closed as this blog post is now archived.

Lines, paragraphs break automatically. HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

The URI to TrackBack this blog entry is this. And here is the RSS 2.0 for comments on this post.