Ideological Utopia

[wayneL]

It's poison IMO, more likely to priduce a dystopia.

I liked this article discusding a mixed social/economic order.. . Discuss

https://niskanencenter.org/blog/public-policy-utopia/

Snip: People often ask me how the Niskanen Center’s philosophy differs from standard-issue libertarianism. Usually I say something substantive and policy-related like, “We think the welfare state and free markets work better together, and that hostility to ‘big government’ can actually be counterproductive and leave us with less freedom,” or something in that vein. That’s the sort of contrast people are generally looking for. But I’m never really happy leaving it at that.

Why not? Because this kind of answer is actually pretty superficial. It doesn’t get to the heart of the matter. For example, it doesn’t really get at what I take to be the nature of the intellectual mistake involved in the standard libertarian rejection of the welfare state. There’s a deeper intellectual issue about how to theorize about politics, and it has nothing in particular to do with libertarianism. It has to do with the utility of something political philosophers call “ideal theory.”

Politics without a compass

Many political philosophers, and most adherents of radical political ideologies, tend to think that an ideal vision of the best social, economic, and political system serves a useful and necessary orienting function.......

 

[Knobby22]

It's poison IMO, more likely to priduce a dystopia.

I liked this article discusding a mixed social/economic order.. . Discuss

https://niskanencenter.org/blog/public-policy-utopia/

Many political philosophers, and most adherents of radical political ideologies, tend to think that an ideal vision of the best social, economic, and political system serves a useful and necessary orienting function.......

Excellent article, quoting:

Suppose we were to poll a bunch of American libertarians, and ask them to tell us which country enjoys more freedom, according the Cato Institute’s metrics. The United States or Sweden? The United States or Germany? The United States or Canada? The United States or Lithuania? I’m pretty sure almost all of them would get it wrong in each of these pairwise comparisons. Why? Because typical libertarians carry an ideal-theoretic picture of the “the free society” around in their heads, and (for some reason!) a minimum of taxation and redistribution is among the most salient aspects of that picture. And that means that Denmark, say, doesn’t seem very free relative to that picture. But there’s a great deal more to freedom than fiscal policy. And we see that, as a matter of fact, the country with the biggest-spending government in the world is among the freest countries in the world, and ranks first in personal freedom.

 

[Logique]

Ideological Utopia? It's worked out well so far in Venezuala, with 80k% inflation in 2018, and people eating their pets

 

[SirRumpole]

Yes , the US ranks very highly in personal freedom.

It has the highest incarceration rate of any country in the world, higher than Russia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_rate

God bless America.

 

[Knobby22]

Again from the article.

Every highlighted country is some version of the liberal-democratic capitalist welfare state. Evidently, this general regime type is good for freedom. Indeed, it is likely the best we have ever done in terms of freedom.

My comments:
Note that liberal means willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; open to new ideas.
welfare state a system whereby the state undertakes to protect the health and well-being of its citizens, especially those in financial or social need, by means of grants, pensions, and other benefits
capitalist and democratic we all understand.

I think you can see that the press being less liberal and the reduction of the welfare state and subversion off the democratic system in the US has led to problems.
Liberal is very important, China can be capitalist and welfare state as much as it wants but there is no freedom as opposing views are not tolerated.

 

[IFocus]

Ideological Utopia? It's worked out well so far in Venezuala, with 80k% inflation in 2018, and people eating their pets

Latin America doesn't count, lovely people but political left / right / center take your pick pretty much always a dogs breakfast, cultural, ethnic, social structures, rampant poverty / corruption and more.

Usually white elites govern and as the skin complexion darkens opportunities grow less.

Pretty much started with Bolivar, spent time there.

 

[PZ99]

God bless America.

That's the problem right there

 

[wayneL]

America bashing and and the soft racism of low expectations all within the first 6 replies

The ASF left did not disappoint, plenty of scope to escalate this though, let's see what you bigots have got.

 

[Knobby22]

What do you think?
Would like to hear your opinion.
Do you think the definition of freedom is wrong?

 

[SirRumpole]

America bashing and and the soft racism of low expectations all within the first 6 replies

The ASF left did not disappoint, plenty of scope to escalate this though, let's see what you bigots have got.

So everything is hunky dory in the US of A wayne ?

 

[wayneL]

America is what it is. The article clearly views other nations as "freer" than the US.... and fwiw, I think the US is in deep s4it on that front, due to this ideological utopianism.

We can't cure a narrow view with... a narrow view.

 

[wayneL]

...and Knobby, liberty is, while simple at its core, is quite complex in reality. A good starting point is of course, Mill's "On Liberty". A short essay that turned into a book.

 

[Knobby22]

If you look up the index there is a map showing ratings. The USA and France score about the same which is high, on South America only Chile seems to do well. Mongolia does OK, stands out compared to its neighbors.

I reckon New Zealand deserves its high ranking.

 

[SirRumpole]

America is what it is. The article clearly views other nations as "freer" than the US.... and fwiw, I think the US is in deep s4it on that front, due to this ideological utopianism.

We can't cure a narrow view with... a narrow view.

Unfortunately I think Oz is going the same way. As an ABC watcher I'm getting a bit tired of all the minority groups telling us how badly off they are in one of the most multicultural nations in the world.

 

[Knobby22]

...and Knobby, liberty is, while simple at its core, is quite complex in reality. A good starting point is of course, Mill's "On Liberty". A short essay that turned into a book.

Yes, there was a great pod cast on this on Radio National (the Philosophers Zone). It was fascinating how various groups have used the book amd Nietzce over the decades to support ideological causes. It has been used by left and right wing causes over the years. Worth getting the ABC listen app.

To me it doesn't represent Liberty but rather Libertarianism. It seems to have been twisted to support individuality above society and for those in strong positions to not help those in weaker positions.

I think freedom is for all, not the feudal view where wealth gives you complete freedom but poverty makes you desperate.

Saw Les Miserables last week, great musical, it accords more with my views. People died trying for Liberty.
The poor had a sort of freedom but in reality no freedom. The fall of Fantine into prostitution and death a clear example of not having Liberty. She was forced by events out of her control into circumstances not her choosing.

I look with disdain those that enjoy the fruits of civilization while seeking to not contribute.

 

[wayneL]

I look with disdain those that enjoy the fruits of civilization while seeking to not contribute.

Interesting view, I gonna think about that one. Meanwhile can you expand on what you mean in the above?

 

[Knobby22]

I will just say that when the French built the Statue of Liberty, they were not doing that so to celebrate that the nobles and landowners had managed to minimise their help to the people and not pay any taxes. To achieving the ability to not contribute to the people with bad luck or health problems and ensure those who are working, work for a bare subsistence wage. To ensure Unions were outlawed and any complainants nullified. To not contribute to public hospitals and public schools. (As this was pretty much the status quo before the Revolution).

If you disagree then you should argue your case. Have you seen Les Miserables?

I think my views are Conservative. I know in my office I am considered the right wing guy. I don't think the British or Menzian conservatives would have any problem with any of this.
If you give a person a fish they eat for a day, if you teach a person to fish they can feed themselves for life.

 

[wayneL]

I will just say that when the French built the Statue of Liberty, they were not doing that so to celebrate that the nobles and landowners had managed to minimise their help to the people and not pay any taxes. To achieving the ability to not contribute to the people with bad luck or health problems and ensure those who are working, work for a bare subsistence wage. To ensure Unions were outlawed and any complainants nullified. To not contribute to public hospitals and public schools. (As this was pretty much the status quo before the Revolution).

If you disagree then you should argue your case. Have you seen Les Miserables?

I think my views are Conservative. I know in my office I am considered the right wing guy. I don't think the British or Menzian conservatives would have any problem with any of this.
If you give a person a fish they eat for a day, if you teach a person to fish they can feed themselves for life.

I'm not quite understanding your point (probably my fault , I'm a bit under the weather today).

However it's what makes liberty such an interesting topic. . The contrast between positive and negative liberty, how one person's liberty may impinge on anothers and so on.

It's never really clear cut.

 

[SirRumpole]

The contrast between positive and negative liberty, how one person's liberty may impinge on anothers and so on.

So where do we stand in this country in your view ?

 

[wayneL]

So where do we stand in this country in your view ?

I think we are doing better than the rest of the anglosphere, but clearly free speech is under attack and we suffer from nanny statery and often excessive, gratuitous regulation.

That is not to say there shouldn't be some sort of regulation. Liberties exist in a hierarchy (or should do) so regulation to codify that is okay by me.