It’s hard to agree with any one particular political
philosophy. Not only does each one have both its valid points and issues—the effectiveness of a given viewpoint is
relative to the level of consciousness to humanity.
Consciousness vs. the Law
For example, in a world where most people exist at a fear-based, low level of awareness, an authoritarian government may be not only effective, but the right way to go. If people are so frightened that they all distrust each other to the point of fighting one another for resources, that society is going to collapse. The only thing that can save such a society is a tough leader who commands people to cooperate enough to survive, and cracks down hard on anyone who falls out of line. That means that crime would be punished very harshly. In other words, in a world where people’s default state is to be hostile in some fashion (stealing, violent, etc.), an authoritarian government is needed to keep society together.
On the flipside, an authoritarian government would not work so well in a world where most people trust each other- including themselves- and are happy to cooperate and give their best to create a prosperous world.
Imagine that I saw someone I wanted to give free apples from my orchard to, just because. I walk up to him and say, “Hello, sir—would you like some apples?” Suddenly, a police officer runs over and says, “YOU BETTER GIVE JOHNNY THOSE APPLES RIGHT NOW, KIM WRATE! IT’S GREEDY PEOPLE LIKE YOU THAT ARE MAKING THIS WORLD STARVE! REEEE!” Then he foams at the mouth.
That would be a tad over the top, don’t you think? In the fear-based world I described, police officers forcing people to share what they have might be effective, even necessary, to keeping things running smoothly. But in a world where people not only trade fairly, but even share freely what they produce in abundance, law enforcement- that is, force- is largely unnecessary.
What I am saying is that the more conscious people are, the less they need the government to intervene in their lives. Read that statement over and over, especially if right-wing perspectives like libertarianism and conservatism appeal to you, because it is the basis on which a government runs.
Comparing Political/Cultural Perspectives
Let me cut to the chase. At least for 2017 and beyond, conservatism is too stagnant, libertarianism is too indifferent, and liberalism, aside from being co-opted by the ruling elite, misses the point.
Here is what I mean.
If we could both expect and desire human behavior to remain largely the same as it always has, a conservative approach to governing people would be a decent long-term strategy. Let there be a free market, and also let there be respect for the law. If you either don’t want to play in the free market in some fashion, or you lose in the free market, the government isn’t going to bail you out. This isn’t good for you in the short-term, but in the long-term it is good for everyone else’s pocketbooks—including that of the government.
Of course, if human behavior was to remain the same for all time, what works in business and in getting a job wouldn’t change much. If you make an honest effort, you will eventually figure out what works, and as long as you continually tweak your approach over time, you’ll probably do fine financially.
As for the law, it would make sense for our laws to deter people from engaging in behaviors that do more harm than good for society. The challenge would be to do this without making the government too imposing on people’s lives.
A conservative government would likely keep illegal all the drugs that are currently illegal now—for instance, cocaine and heroin. This would be the case even without the government’s malicious, hidden agenda for keeping drugs illegal that exists presently. This is because the use of these drugs has proven over and over to produce a net negative on society. As such, it would make sense for a respectable law enforcement to prevent the distribution and use of such substances as much as it can, though without infringing on people’s basic liberties (e.g. respect that fourth amendment, please!).
Conservatism is a fine approach legally. It’s great that we can both enjoy basic freedoms and have laws and law enforcement that protect us. The government has to be small enough for us to have freedoms in the first place, yet also big enough to defend those freedoms- including the freedom to be alive- from criminals and outsiders who attempt to take those freedoms away.
Where conservatism doesn’t do so well is in regards to culture. If you are culturally conservative, you basically think that humans should follow the same way of life that they always have. This means that we should have the same beliefs and practices that we have had for years—for instance, the same clothes, types of relationships, art, religions, traditions, and so on that we always have.
To be specific, a culturally-conservative American might believe that pre- and extra-marital sex is evil, as is having children out of wedlock, using birth control, and sodomy.
Historically, encouraging people to get married and to have children (but only once they are married) made sense. Not only that, but marrying and having children flies in the face of the above-listed “transgressions.” If you want to build a strong society, and the people in that society don’t tend to live very long, then you need people to have plenty of children and to raise them well. This means that birth control, homosexuality, and “casual” relationships between men and women are not in your interest.
In today’s world, where average life expectancy is in the 60s and there are 7 billion people on the planet, strong, child-bearing relationships between one man and one woman who are married to each other aren’t as urgent of a need that they used to be. Note that I said as urgent of a need. This means that such relationships are still valuable to our world. In that regard, the cultural-conservatives are right.
However, for the conservatives to say that everyone should adhere to this traditional
way of life is over the top. A small number of people are better off living alone, for instance.
So, the problem with cultural conservatism is that it is excessively condemning and stifling. As the kids would say, cultural conservatism is boring.
Let’s face it. Are we really going to eat the same foods, have the same kinds of relationships, consume the same art/media, wear the same clothes, and say the same things just because we always have? We’re going to keep our culture stagnant and rigid just because some aspects of that culture have been functional?
Are you sure we can’t do something better? Are you sure that what you call “taboo” is necessarily so? Are you sure it can’t hurt to let people explore things that have been condemned and see what the real truth about them is?
Of course, cultural liberalism (AKA cultural Marxism) is no good either because, in its present form, it basically encourages that which conservatives have traditionally condemned. Liberalism has not only made conservative values look boring—the liberals have also distorted our traditions in such a way that they look evil. Being straight is “homophobic,” they say. Being monogamous is “sexist.” Being in a relationship with someone of the same race is “racist.” Having children is “misogynistic.” On and on and on…
Most people who call themselves “liberals” are probably well-intended. They want it to be OK for people who deviate from the norms to exist.
The problem with liberalism, aside from being created by people who want to destroy all of us, is that it is sorely misguided. It misses the point.
In humans in the present day, evolution lies in the arena of consciousness. The point is to advance our thoughts and to live in line with the essence of who we really are. This is what conscious growth is.
Liberals say they want human evolution, but they completely overlook consciousness. Instead they obsess about all the stuff on the outside—the race, the gender, the sexuality, and so on. To them it’s all about the identities people wear and the behaviors they engage in. As if humans are nothing more than collections of labels and actions.
The essence of liberalism is supposed to be that it’s OK to have different desires from most people, as long as those desires don’t hurt anybody. Unfortunately, liberalism has gone so far off the rails in the last few years, it takes that statement to the next level: modern liberalism tells us that Not only is it OK to be different—if you are normal, you are oppressive and evil!
Again, liberalism is making the mistake of thinking that growth is all about what’s on the outside, like your behaviors, as opposed to what’s inside, like your genuine desires and larger understanding of life. While what’s on the outside does matter, it is not what matters in the end.
Finally, we have libertarianism. Libertarianism basically says that people should be free to do as they please, as long as it respects basic rights (including private property) and is non-violent.
While this sounds fine and well, it is too passive. Libertarianism reeks of indifference.
If people want to smoke crack all day we should just let ‘em, ‘cause it’s their right—right?
We need to be vigilant as to when things go too far. We need to recognize in ourselves, in our individual relationships, and in our society as a whole when we are doing more harm than good.
For example, if 50% of people on the planet considered themselves to be homosexual, something would be off. That would be a situation we need to critically address.
Libertarianism, though, wouldn’t care to do so. It would just say, “Well, people are free to do that, and if 50% of people make that choice, so be it.”
Libertarianism’s problem here is that it is prioritizing its short-term values (absolute freedom) over long-term truth. The long-term truth in this case is that only about 1% of people may be truly, naturally, congruently homosexual, if such a thing is even possible. If the number goes much higher than that, there is probably either some kind of biological crisis going on that is making people gay (like there currently is), or there are a bunch of fake liberals going around brainwashing people into being gay (which they currently are). Whatever the case, such a situation would be worth seriously investigating, as opposed to sitting on our asses just so people can be “free.”
If people are unhealthy or being lied to, they aren’t free! Get that through your heads, libertarians!
An effective political strategy would combine pieces of each political viewpoint and be principle-centered. These principles are the same ones I described in Success Is Sustainability: Steve Pavlina’s Truth, Love, and Power; and Neale Donald Walsch’s Functionality, Adaptability, and Sustainability.
Truth and Functionality are one and the same: what is true is what works. The principle of Truth is best governed by conservatism: it acknowledges things about humanity that have been true and that have worked for hundreds of years, if not all across time. Long-functioning aspects of humanity include the free market, freedom of speech, meritocracy (i.e. rewarding people based on their merits, such as abilities and accomplishments), and the right to bear arms. Absolute truth is timeless; as such, conservatism serves the principle of Truth well.
Love is about connecting with what we desire, which includes communicating with and living alongside (i.e. communing with) other human beings. To realize our desires, we must adapt reality in a way that it can and does bring us those desires (if that’s confusing, think of it as your personal reality). This means that Love and Adaptability are interconnected. The principle of Love is best governed by liberalism, because liberalism encourages us to go after our desires shamelessly and to accept- that is, adapt to- one another, no matter what our differences may be.
Finally, whereas Love refers to desire in itself, Power refers to our ability to realize our desires. Power is all about effective, efficient action. It is nice to talk about what we want and how being different is OK, but if you are unable to make things happen, then none of that talk matters. The principle of Power is best governed by libertarianism, because libertarianism respects individual freedom and encourages people to be self-determined. Indeed, Power requires a person to have both the freedom to consult his own intelligence as well as the self-determination to follow through on it. A society based on individual freedom and empowerment is the only way the evolution of humanity and the growth of consciousness can continue in earnest: as such, Power goes hand in hand with Sustainability. Without power, prosperity cannot be sustained.
In this three-part system, each of the political perspectives respects one another. Conservatism respects the truths held within liberalism and libertarianism, and values the roles of each in making society functional. Liberalism encourages us to adapt in order to live in line with timeless truths (i.e. conservatism), and its emphasis on personal desire encourages us to use our power and appreciate our freedom to do so (libertarianism). Lastly, libertarianism needs Truth (conservatism) in order to be effective, and it requires both (1) the specific desires of Love, in order to be focused; and (2) Power must be tempered by Love so as to keep people from harming themselves and each other.
In practice, this means politically conservative, culturally libertarian, and personally liberal. In other words, vote conservative (especially on financial matters); let people do and say what they want (as long as there is not a net negative on society); and, in your own life, embrace the new, and also help people when it makes sense to you to do so.
This is a system that both respects that the citizens of a society are conscious, and it encourages them to become more conscious. By plugging in political perspectives to universal principles, this system also encourages a solid government that administrates an ever-growing society, the advancement of which is organically facilitated by conscious citizens who are both free and naturally inclined to grow.
The Complete Reality
In other words, the growth of our society is inextricably linked to the growth of individual consciousness. The prosperity of all relies on the prosperity of each one of us.
To advance, we must advance freely, intelligently, and carefully—that is, with freedom from tyranny, with the intelligence forged from thousands of years of human existence, and with care for what we deep down know we want and know is right. Any society that attempts to throw off the interplay of conservatism, liberalism, and libertarianism will hold itself back in the long run, unless and until it adapts. Even if the citizens of that society are fearful and at a low level of consciousness, an authoritarian government can help them to grow for only so long. Eventually, basic freedom must replace tyranny—otherwise, humans would remain fearful forever.
Finally, the point of being a conscious human is not to marry any particular perspective or idea. Rather, the way to expand consciousness is by studying a perspective seriously, recognizing its valid points, and then integrating those points into a comprehensive picture of reality composed of all the valid points of all perspectives conceivable.
This is our collective task in this existence: to form as complete an understanding of reality as possible. We are forever creating ourselves in the image of God, and simultaneously redefining God. In other words, we are creating ourselves as God. God is painting a portrait of himself. But, he is not only using paint—he is using every medium imaginable: pencil, marker, pen, musical instruments, dance, poetry, scientific research, computer programming, and all the rest of it. God is creating himself in every way possible and in every detail, so that he may know himself in fullness. This he must do, because he is all of it. The only way to understand yourself, when you are all of it, is to divide the all into individual pieces, study the pieces thoroughly, and then assemble those pieces in such a way that they form something larger than themselves-- something which holds the potential for infinite Truth, infinite Love, and infinite Power. You and I are both the individual pieces as well as God. Because God is all, this is the only reality possible.
And so it is.
We are God, and we rule our own world.