On leaving the circle dance
Don’t underestimate how emotionally difficult it is. I know precisely what “Jan in MN” is talking about here:
Self-image shouldn’t be underestimated as a reason to close one’s mind to facts. I remember, in my change process, how frightening it was to begin acknowledging myself as conservative, one of those awful people. My initial step away from the liberal viewpoint was during the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill hearings, but it wasn’t enough to make me depart the liberal camp entirely. The process was painful, as I saw friends drop away and as my concept of myself changed. Liberals, I had thought, were the caring folk, morally superior, and who wouldn’t want to be cozily wrapped up in that image?
Finally, facts mattered more, but it can be tough wrenching oneself away from the regard and cameraderie of friends and a philosophy that seemed so true and pure.
And I will now repeat a passage that I’ve quoted before in several previous posts. For me, it never gets old. It’s from the Czech author Milan Kundera’s novel The Book of Laughter and Forgetting, which he wrote in the late 1970s:
Circle dancing is magic. It speaks to us through the millennia from the depths of human memory. Madame Raphael had cut the picture out of the magazine and would stare at it and dream. She too longed to dance in a ring. All her life she had looked for a group of people she could hold hands with and dance with in a ring. First she looked for them in the Methodist Church (her father was a religious fanatic), then in the Communist Party, then among the Trotskyites, then in the anti-abortion movement (A child has a right to life!), then in the pro-abortion movement (A woman has a right to her body!); she looked for them among the Marxists, the psychoanalysts, and the structuralists; she looked for them in Lenin, Zen Buddhism, Mao Tse-tung, yogis, the nouveau roman, Brechtian theater, the theater of panic; and finally she hoped she could at least become one with her students, which meant she always forced them to think and say exactly what she thought and said, and together they formed a single body and a single soul, a single ring and a single dance.
Don’t underestimate how profoundly difficult it can be to step outside the circle.
A personal note—I never really had a desire to dance in a ring. In fact, I had a bit of a horror of it. But—and it’s a big “but”—I grew up in an atmosphere in which being a liberal Democrat (which was much less extreme a position than it is now) seemed to me to be reasonable and moral and kind. For much of my life I had paid only a sort of general attention to politics and world events. I wasn’t what you’d call a political junkie. I had some marked disagreements with the liberal line I heard around me, and I sometimes voiced them to other liberals, but my disagreements never seemed all that fundamental to anyone, including me, and they earned little or no enmity.
I was a part of a circle without even realizing it.
When I started the process of political change outlined on this blog in my “A mind is a difficult thing to change” series, I had absolutely no idea that I was taking a small step outside that circle in which I had danced, unawares, my entire life. And I had no idea that that first step would soon be followed by another, and another, until without even realizing that it had happened, I was standing far away looking in.
I’ve never fully joined another circle. As I said, circle dancing isn’t something for which I yearn. Now I seem to dance on the periphery of the circle formed by the right—weaving in and out, sometimes closer, sometimes further away. Some in that other far-off circle—the one with most of my friends and relatives—have shunned me, but at least the ones dancing there who still love me have decided that when we get together they will stop dancing for a while.
But the experience has been far more painful and far more wrenching than I ever would have imagined.
I have every sympathy with people undergoing, or who have undergone, such a change.
I was never part of a circle dance in the first place, partly because I was an only child, my father died when I was 15, and my mother was an emotionally abusive narcissist. She married my stepfather just one week before I started my freshman year of college, so I knew early on I would have to chart my own course. It’s not that I didn’t have friends– I made many friends from junior high school onward, but my friends were (and are) like me, intellectually curious and independent thinkers. I suppose you could say I’ve been part of a group of dance soloists rather than a corps de ballet— or if you prefer a baseball metaphor, I’ve been part of a team of admirable position players.
So while I understand just how painful your change process was and is, most of my pain was family-of-origin-related rather than a byproduct of political change in adult life. When I read your thoughts on the subject of circle dancing, I’ve come to recognize that in some respects, I got off easy.
Human’s are a very conformist species despite what we like to think of ourselves. I noticed this when I worked at a grocery store. People would bypass an open check stand to get in the longest line. Why? Just because that was what everyone was doing.
There has to be some conformity for the group to survive (hence so the individual can survive) but there are so many people who unthinkingly conform. I know people who change there beliefs with every group they belong. I don’t mean they lie. Just that they accept what other people around them say.
Liberals are the biggest circle dancers around (though this behavior certainly exists on the right) but they believe they think for themselves.
Yes, this is such an essential human experience! However wonderful it is, staying the circle dance is really about staying immature and not differentiating, not growing up. After the two world wars, our culture started to long for this wonderful experience and belonging after all the suffering. We elevated childhood as some magical time, leading to the flower children and hippies and free love, just a circle dance. As a society, we are still see the good feeling of enmeshment with those just like us (child and mom). Growing up is such a pain, yet if we do not we die, at least psychically. Of course, we now have the means, at least through budget deficits, to maintain the circle. Madelaine L’Engle wrote about this circle death in her book, “The Wind in the Door”, and how deadly it was to stay in the dance. At some point we will lose the wealth that allows us as a society to stay in the dance.
Yesterday there was a great comment on a thread on Watts Up With That on right/left and “denying climate change”. I was so struck that I’ve copied it here as it’s relevant to what makes up this right/left difference and why for the left it’s hard to change. Credi to the commentator, “Craig from Oz”.
“Craig from Oz:
There is an observed phenomenon known as “the Conservative Advantage”.
In a nut shell a conservative (Righty) is more likely to guess how a non-conservative (Lefty) would react in a given situation and why, than a non-conservative understanding a conservative.
When you consider what the core beliefs of a Right and a Left actually are then this phenomenon makes even more sense.
A Right is deep down somewhat selfish in that they tend to want what is best for themselves and their immediate loved ones. They generally don’t seek to change others provided said others do not have a direct affect on them. What this means is that not only can they ‘shop around’ for the best ideas that best suit them, they are also very content to allow others to be ‘different’ provided they don’t actively cause trouble. Conservatives – paradoxically from the name – are usually much more broad minded when it comes to ideas and also, because they don’t usually see others are direct threats, more likely to embrace them and provide help when they truly need it. Go to a true community group and play spot the leftie.
Left types think differently. They are about being Fair. They believe that basically everything would be better if only THEY were in charge because the world is selfish and unfair. True they may have a point, but a Leftist believes the world needs to be made fair. They want change, but they want change where they are making the rules because they know best and they are right. People who disagree with them, by extension, are wrong. Not different. Wrong.
So while a conservative will see a different person, muse over it and find it amusing before moving on, a Left will see a wrong person. They will see them as a challenger because they are right and this other person is wrong. They will rarely attempt to understand why because what is there to understand. They are right and the other person is wrong. Simple as that.
As a result Lefts are actually more close minded than conservatives. Sure they will push people to be more open minded, but only in the sense of ‘why do you not agree with ME you close minded fool?!’ They are also more insensitive to others. To them there are people who agree with them within the echo chamber, people who are victim minorities they believe they should be championing (regardless of what the ‘minorities’ actually want), and people who disagree (aka – the enemy).
They also lack the ability to change their mindset because they have already established that they are right. Their whole view exists based around the concept that They Know Best. So for them to accept that they were in fact ‘wrong’ about something they are required to re-think their entire world view. If they were wrong about ‘x’ then what is to say they were not wrong about EVERYTHING else. Where as a conservative would accept they were wrong about what is a small part of their lives, change their world view to suit and move on, a Left is forced to question everything they have ever believed. Most can’t and instead reject it outright, often with hostility.
Put simply, not only do Lefts fail to understand Rights, they are actually mentally unable to.”
“Liberals are the biggest circle dancers around (though this behavior certainly exists on the right) but they believe they think for themselves.”
I find many of them even become hostile if you disagree.
And if they have the time or will, they shame you.
And many shun you, plus sadly pass on the “gossip” of what they now KNOW about you. I.e., they hang the stereotype of the “deplorable” on everything about you.
Of course, i live in a very lefty town … and am working to leave it.
“All her life she had looked for a group of people she could hold hands with and dance with in a ring. First she looked for them in the Methodist Church (her father was a religious fanatic)… finally she hoped she could at least become one with her students, which meant she always forced them to think and say exactly what she thought and said, and together they formed a single body and a single soul, a single ring and a single dance.” Milan Kundera’s novel The Book of Laughter and Forgetting [my emphasis]
It seems evident to me that she never stopped looking for a brand of fanaticism that she could embrace. And, other than an example of how not to be and think, I’m doubtful that there’s much to be gained from studying any form of fanaticism.
I too love to dance but I’ve never had a desire to dance in a ring either. Though I did have an opportunity to do so at a wedding once, I couldn’t bring myself to join in. For better or for worse, I’m just not a herd animal.
As for the emotional difficulty in changing, I don’t enjoy being rejected either, which I certainly experienced. But when it comes to what I believe to be true and right… I really couldn’t give a damn what other people think. I suspect that’s why I was able to change.
Having attained Plato’s “ripe old age”, having seen it all, may one just say that the point is not to stand outside “the circle” but above it. Meandering Washington Square off Greenwich Village in Summer 1966 (Oyez!), one thing stood out: This will not end well.
No-one aware of Human Nature in the raw –and if you don’t know, or haven’t learned it in your 20s, you’ll find out– grants “circle dancers” even good intentions. In proper perspective,that fussy, timid little Circle shrinks to an infinitesimal point and whisks away.
We’ll go with Fitzgerald’s “Rubaiyat”, Henley’s “Invictus”, Kipling’s “Gods of the Copybook Headings”–
“It matters not how strait the gate, how charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate: I am the captain of my soul” (Henley, 1875).
This is an interesting concept. I’ve always thought of political parties as more like tribes. Circle dances – or even square dances – never occurred to me. I get the “dance” part. But I do wonder if in modern American politics the “circle” part is more like a firing squad than a dance.
I never paid attention to politics until in my early 20s. I was a math major, an athlete, maintained a social life, and in the 1960s that seemed enough for me. Vietnam had a different effect on me vs most of my friends. It pushed me away from the Democratic Party that, I felt, deceived Americans by enlarging the war in 1964 at the same time promising not to. That is not a theoretical point; I as many of my age, lost friends and acquaintances in Asia, Around the time I started to pay attention to politics, Nixon was in office. So I never registered in a political party until I finally registered as a Democrat in 1974. Hmmm, why that particular year I wonder?
I’m comfortable being pretty much in the middle politically – slightly left of center on some things, to the right on others. I’m no apparatchik. I voted for Carter, then Reagan 2Xs, then GHWB, then Clinton 1x, Dole, GWB 2Xs, Obama 1X, Romney, and then Trump. I voted for Dole and Romney only because their opponents had disgraced the office. And I was ABC – anyone but Carter. Then to my surprise I liked Reagan a lot. I feel the same way about Trump, if the next election were today I’d vote for Trump again. In state and local elections, I’m also not particularly aligned with Democrats. Living in Connecticut, I find that my alignment diminishes every cycle. As Reagan might have said, I am not leaving the Democratic Party the Democratic Party is leaving me.
So if I won’t stay aligned with Democrats, why stay a Democrat? I have 3 main reasons
1. I still vote in the Democratic Party primaries. In Connecticut, the Republicans have primaries, but have not historically nominated many winners – although that may be changing. I can vote for whomever I want in the general elections anyway.
2. I believe that being a registered Democrat in Connecticut gives me additional credibility when I voice my own opinions, whether speaking with people on the left or the right.
3. It maintains familial peace with my 3 adult children. (Although, interestingly, that may be changing. One lives in Baltimore, the other two in NYC and they are not happy with failed Democratic leadership in both cities.)
I feel somewhat like Michael J Fox in Back to the Future when he realized not everyone appreciated his guitar solo, I did not mean to ramble. Sorry. I see now I was writing for myself, not for anyone else. In fact, if only I had more time, I would have written a shorter comment – a sentiment thought to have originated with Marcus Tullius Cicero or Blaise Pascal or Mark Twain . . . but claimed by many others, ?
I was part of a science circle.
And conservative left until the hard wake-up call of 9/11.
Then I became aware of the leftward drift of the science circle.
I now stand outside.
Trump was a fish swimming in the lefty ocean of New York — doing what was necessary to survive as a businessman there.
He detected the leftward drift toward catastrophe earlier than I did.
He also stands outside.
Moving from the “Left” to the “Right” is a fundamental change in your way of thinking. Charles Krauthammer was right when you said the main difference between the Left & Right was that the left views the Right as EEeeville (Vincent Price voice) while the Right views the Left as either ignorant or stupid. That’s a vast simplification, but it is still valid.
It’s a fundamentally different view point, because the Left has adopted its politics as it’s religion. Anyone who opposes your religion is literally evil…so, if your politics are your religion, then those who oppose you ARE the embodiment of evil. It’s as simple as that.
Matthew,
” People would bypass an open check stand to get in the longest line. Why? Just because that was what everyone was doing.”
I ALWAYS look for the shortest line and in fairness, I’ve seen plenty of people do so as well. Perhaps there’s more than a few ‘non-joiners’ out there?
Joe,
As you indicate, deficits have an unknown expiration date. And any society whose majority refuses to grow up… also has an expiration date.
physicsguy,
“A Right is deep down somewhat selfish in that they tend to want what is best for themselves and their immediate loved ones.”
Is it ‘selfish’ to accept that, “Charity begins at home”? Is it selfish to believe in the rule of law? The sanctity of marriage? That 3 year olds are too young to decide upon their gender ‘identity’? That abortion extinguishes a life separate from their mother?
Me thinks ‘Craig from Oz’ paints with a bit too broad a brush.
“a Leftist believes the world needs to be made fair.”
Liberals believe that the world should be fair.
Some leftist idealists believe the world needs to be made fair.
All leftists believe that those who think like them should be in charge.
Some leftists believe that claiming that the world can be made more fair with them leading the way is a great way to acquire power, which is of course what they are really all about.
“not only do Lefts fail to understand Rights, they are actually mentally unable to”
Alan Dershowitz being the sole exception to that rule?
A few years ago in a poll, it was revealed that of those who self-identify as “strongly liberal” 40% frequently feel pride in being an American.
So, John Fembup, as a fellow resident of the once great state of Connecticut, can you explain to me, as a center left person, why the people in this state complain about its situation, yet they keep voting in the fools who continue the process? They bitched about Maloy, and then voted in Lamont., and gave the Dems total control of both houses. Now we have to deal with the state telling us we can’t have plastic bags at the damn grocery store, and the economy in the state continues to tank while the rest of the country is enjoying an economic expansion. I think most of the people in this state are insane circle dancers.
Unlike so many here, I DO crave the circle dance – the sense of belonging, and knowing the steps, and fitting in. This tendency of mine has made my adult life interesting. I spent twelve years in a purple-going-blue state attending a pretty deep blue church, hiding my conservatism because that church was the center of my life. For a long time I was able to put up with it, to have the occasional drink with the handful of other conservatives chuckling over the latest woke pronouncement to come from our church’s national body.
And then I was having lunch with the church choir, the center of my center, as we all prepared for a major feast day, and everyone got to talking about the upcoming election (it must have been 2012). These people I loved, whom I knew without a doubt were kind and thoughtful and cared deeply about others, who gave their time and money in support of the needy, spent that lunch in an extended Two Minutes’ Hate against anyone Republican. I sat there for as long as I could (because I still didn’t want to “come out” even though I suspected that if I had, right then, they would have blushed and stammered and apologized and said that of course they hadn’t meant ME), then unobtrusively left the room.
One guy followed me out and asked quietly if I’d been made uncomfortable by the conversation. I again chickened out and said that I just didn’t like political discussions while doing churchy things. Pretty sure he guessed the truth, but as far as I know, he never outed me.
I dropped all social media in 2016 as these and more of my dear friends revealed their animus against people like me. I now live in a red state. That move was not for the purpose of escaping the increasing blueness around me, but it has made me much more comfortable, since I still want to belong. Maybe someday I’ll be able to speak openly to anyone and everyone about my convictions; until then, I’m sure I’ll just keep avoiding the subject, when I know I’m going to (a) be viewed as either malevolent or stupid by leftist friends, and (b) learn too much about those leftist friends if I try to engage with them. I’m not proud of any of this. I come on these blogs to practice my arguments in hopes I’ll one day use them – but also to feel I’m in the dance I want to be in.
Now I seem to dance on the periphery of the circle formed by the right—weaving in and out, sometimes closer, sometimes further away.
Sounds like a square dance, and you’re dosey-doeing. It’s kinda fun.
Rich Vail on August 2, 2019 at 5:56 pm said:
…the Left has adopted its politics as it’s religion.
This. “Racist” is a warding word, not an actual accusation of specified wrongdoing. Observing progressivism makes much more sense when you realize that.
There is an adage, at least among conservatives, that goes something like this: “If you aren’t a progressive when you are 20, you have no heart; if you are still a progressive when you are 40, you have no brain.” Maybe you just grew up?
The left is a circle dance of conformity progressing over time to a totalitarianism that at present encompasses the entire mainstream of the Democratic party and falls short of Maoist murder-cult totalitarianism only in it’s not having yet achieved full totalitarian power. The totalitarian ambition of at least a third of the country is near total.
But there is an equally large circle on the other side that is the circle of liberty lovers who are celebratory and protective not just of their own liberty but of each other’s liberty and are hostile only to the enemies of liberty.
I find that circle often, and take pleasure as well in inviting the other side to it. “Oh no, another mass shooting in a ‘gun-free’ defender-free zone. Can you believe that there are people who think the problem is that they weren’t defenseless enough? [In slight falsetto:] ‘Only when EVERYONE is completely defenseless will be finally be safe!’ Yeh, right.”
The fact that it’s difficult and emotional points at the exact reason why it’s such a problem: people are using emotion and tribal identity to evaluate policy ideas.
Which is not only bad for the individual for obvious reasons, it leads to terrible policy ideas that don’t address actual human behavior and incentives.
A bad deal in every way.
This “circle dance” metaphor is a great way to understand the animus against Trump. Not that there aren’t legitimate reasons to disdain him but that doesn’t, for example, explain the persistent behavior of Trump-haters jumping to conclusions about him only to be proven wrong in short order. Like Trump mentioning he was at Ground Zero after 9/11 and lefties immediately assuming he was lying about it, as though every New York City celebrity didn’t go to Ground Zero in the days and weeks after the attack. And of course, video of Trump at Ground Zero was almost instantly found.
Trump is from outside the circle dance of the people who think they run America (and the world). He’s now barged his way into the middle of their dance and insists on doing his own steps to his own music no matter how much they cry and yell at him.
Mike
I learned about “virtue signaling” decades before I had heard the term. A friend of my elder sister wrote a snarky article in the school newspaper about a junior high group who met every Friday afternoon to support civil rights efforts in the South. He implied that they were meeting not so much because they were in support of civil rights as they were doing what was the in-thing for their group to do. (This was in New England, so supporting civil rights in the South wasn’t a controversial stance.) I suspect that one reason he put down the group was that it included his younger sister.
The following year, a peer of my sister informed me and others that his father had signed a petition against the Vietnam War that had appeared in the New York Times. A whole bunch of “cool people” had signed the petition, he told us.
That informed me that group affiliation had a lot to do with signing the petition. As long as you are with the “cool people,” why bother thinking things out for yourself? As the son of the petition signer was a Merit Finalist, that also told me that even the highly intelligent are vulnerable to deciding things by group affiliation- later to be called “virtue signaling.”
That was one of the beginning steps of my leaving the fold.
Guess your site is working and no database error exists.
Must have been my browser, though Google indicated the site was unavailable too.
Huh
C.S. Lewis in his book “The Weight of Glory and Other Addresses” included an address given at King’s College, University of London, December 14, 1944, by the name “The Inner Ring”. “The Inner Ring” is a fascinating read. However, in my view, “The Weight of Glory” is simply a sublime piece of literature.
Jeff Brokaw,
“people are using emotion and tribal identity to evaluate policy ideas. …it leads to terrible policy ideas that don’t address actual human behavior and incentives.”
That’s true. But as the left’s premises, extending logic and conclusions proceed from a rejection of both human nature and operative principles that govern the external reality within which we all exist… it is impossible for the left’s policies to “address actual human behavior and incentives”.
Earlier I opined that;
“Liberals believe that the world should be fair.
Some leftist idealists believe the world needs to be made fair.
All leftists believe that those who think like them should be in charge.”
At base, the belief that the world ‘should’ be fair is rejecting what is, i.e. reality and of necessity, the creator of the reality within which we exist.
At base the belief that the world can be made fair is indicative of a disconnection from reality. As I’ve pointed out before; both civilizational progress and evolution itself are impossible without life’s inherent “unequal sharing of blessings”.
As Rich Vail observed, “the Left has adopted its politics as it’s religion.”
All religious fanatics (idealistic leftists) believe that utopia can only be achieved if they are in charge.
“A fanatic is a man who does, what he knows God would do . . . if only God had all the facts of the matter” Finley Peter Dunne
Rich Vail on August 2, 2019 at 5:56 pm —
You are correct sir.
If I had to think about being in a dance, or a group, or being out of it, I’d say I’ve always felt on the outside. I could be in a group effort for one thing or another, civil rights, or …anything. Or even a conversation with friends.
I spent two summers in MS doing the civil rights thing. Such groups generally recruited from the campus left. And they didn’t do well with mesomorphs or jocks from the combat sports (football, etc.). I’d competed in lax and judo. If there’d been an election about who was most likely to earn an Infantry commission with Airborne quals, I’d have won.
So, of course, I was on the outside. But affiliated. I think that’s how I’ve felt pretty much anywhere.
So I guess I’ve felt freer than some who’ve been in the circle to just go my own way when not attending to the affiliation of whatever.
I’ve never thought liberals were kinder, more moral….. I thought they were silly and illogical and wanted the government–maybe they had Daddy issues–to make happen what they thought would be a good idea. That it might not be a good idea could not be discussed.
To Jaimie: That is the most honest post I have read in, well, ever! You have described, I am sure, the vast majority of us. You can dance with me and us. We’ll allow you to think freely.
I thought I was on the left until 9/11 and, more profoundly, the Second Intifada. Seeing provable lies accepted as truth, and seeing the lionization of Rachel Corrie, made me think – if they’re lying about this, what else are they lying about? The answer – everything. Once I realized that, I could look back at other events in my life and realize that even if I’m not “conservative,” I’ve always hated the preening of the Left and PC culture in general.
Once you step outside of the circle dance, you can’t return. It’s a bell that can’t be unrung. I don’t talk about it much, although I somehow manage to navigate my way through it with my lib friends. One of these days, though, I know they’re going to turn on me. I hope, when (not if) that happens, I have the strength and fortitude to defend myself and my true ideas.
m. a. I’m not sure you can defend your ideas. You have facts but the conclusions don’t fit so the facts don’t matter. As it happens, reciting facts is hurtful and offensive and hateful.
And you don’t need to defend yourself unless physically attacked. You either point and laugh or you ignore the complainers.
I’m glad I live in a small Texas town where the TV’s in restaurants are tuned to Fox News instead of CNN.
Which political vector—or tilt— would be most advantageous to humans living in tribes of 50-150 for 250,000 years in Africa?….assuming everyone is mostly hungry all the time, everyone is mostly frightened all the time, everyone has sore feet and skin infections most of the time, everyone is too cold or too hot most of the time, everyone is dying and losing loved ones most of the time, everyone is trying to protect the kids desperately, and everyone is fiercely protecting the women with kids. And further, good sleep is nearly impossible as everyone hears noises at night believing bands of attacker’s are just over the next hill?
Would it be better to be conservative and want to protect what we have created? Or liberal and try to change our terrible situation? Which way were we? Is this why we made it?
“There is an adage, at least among conservatives, that goes something like this: “If you aren’t a progressive when you are 20, you have no heart; if you are still a progressive when you are 40, you have no brain.””
In the original, it’s not “progressive” and “(not)progressive”, it’s “liberal” and “conservative” … AND, in the original, “liberal” means what we Americans mean by “conservative”, and “conservative” means what leftists mean by “reactionary”.
“As a result Lefts are actually more close minded than conservatives. Sure they will push people to be more open minded, but only in the sense of ‘why do you not agree with ME you close minded fool?!’”
That was one of the first lessons I learned when I went away to college in 1975. My “liberal” “friends” had a habit of accusing me of being closed-minded when I would attempt to explain why their opinion about some matter was wrong (and mine was right). Notice: I tried to explain my rationale, which is to say, to reason with them; they merely declared themselves to be right (and rational), and me to be wrong … and un-rational.
Dnaxy:
“Conservative” in the political sense does not mean keeping what you have. Conservatives often want change if they don’t think the status quo is working. The word “conservative” is somewhat misleading in that sense.
The Kremlin was “conservative” once they were in power, and those who wanted more liberty, small government, and capitalism (things that “conservatives” in this country would like to defend) were the revolutionaries.
It’s not about the dancing. It’s about who’s standing at the podium and playing the music.
I was blessed. Conservative parents, conservative extended family, and they all explained from a young age and onwards their concept for what it means to be conservative. Be an individual and think for yourself, the government that governs least governs best, never trust government officials to be anything other in government for their own advantage, always be focused on the best interests of your locality, never trust DC, work hard and be frugal, never think you can save anyone who does not wish to save themselves, and last of all, but importantly, be well armed. The cornerstone of society is family, friends (you can trust), and an understanding of the above principles.
That is my circle.
Having neer belonged anywhere, i never had to step outside, for me all circles are forbidden…
What do people feel is the single most distinguishing characteristic of liberals v conservatives?
Whatever this is, is it relevant in all human societies? What about in cultures with multiple political parties? Or is this true in still-extant hunter-gatherers?
I.e., Are we really divided, say cognitively and emotionally, into two political subsets? If so, could our politics have a genetic basis?
Apparently I’m just a natural loner and/or eccentric and/or contrarian. The only thing of the circle dance sort that I’ve ever been part of was the counter-culture of the last few years of the ’60s. By 1971 I was thoroughly disenchanted and out of that. Since then I’ve been part of various things, but have always kept a certain distance from them, never joined in the dance. For instance, I admitted ca. 1980 that as far as politics was concerned I’d become a conservative, but never considered myself part of the movement.
“liberal Democrat (which was much less extreme a position than it is now) seemed to me to be reasonable and moral and kind.”
I noticed a long time ago that leftists believe they are intellectually and morally superior people so if you disagree with them you are not just wrong but stupid and evil. Of course this belief in their own superiority is just hubris.
I might be the oldest commenting here, My parents were New Deal Democrats in Chicago. I went away to college in 1956. I was an Engineering major but took an Economics class. It made me a Republican because I began to understand Economics. In those days. Democrats were not that far left but I could still tell the difference. John F Kennedy came to the USC campus that fall. A girl I knew, who was a very level headed girl, went to a rally and became a “Jumper,” one of the fanatic Kennedy girls who would keep jumping up and down at rallies to see him. That told me a lot about what was going on.
My parents were outraged when I told them I voted for Nixon, Among other things, we were supposedly related to Kennedy. Years later, my mother told me she had always been a Republican but I didn’t believe her. Maybe she was and had just pretended to keep my father happy,
I have five kids and they are distributed politically from Republican to Bernie bro. Two are lawyers and are Democrats. That discussion of the differences between left and right rings very true to me. One daughter, the Bernie bro, was upset one time because a Texas school district wanted creationism taught along with Evolution. I asked her if it was more important to teach Evolution or reading and math. She agreed reading and math are more important so I have hopes for her.
Jamie on August 2 at 6:15:
You are not alone! That kind of surreal duality is my problem with progressivism. I’ve seen it in a ‘moderate’ church trustee meeting, of all places. They — the kind and tolerant — suddenly broke out in sneering disdain at a more conservative denomination for “kicking out gays.” I could not help but point out that our own convention had just dissociated several churches for adopting a welcoming-and-affirming approach. By stating this incontrovertible fact, I stopped the two-minute hate but became immediately suspect. Outside the nice circle.
Jamie didn’t even have to say anything to become suspect. That’s another problem with progressivism: you have to continuously add your voice to remain in the circle. You can’t quietly listen and learn, or ponder, or wait for further developments, or fail to reTweet, or not put a rainbow sticker in your classroom or whatever everyone is doing today. Silence is complicit. Best to vocally and visibly join/affirm/speak out/call out. Exhausting, but risky not to keep up.
My main beefs with progressivism are (1) this collectively fear-induced conformity, and (2) shaming anything else, even shaming reason. These two traits struck me, and still strike me, in every Senate confirmation hearing on SCOTUS nominees. It’s there that I first saw official sneering shaming and disdain for people based on, for example, their constitutional philosophy and scholarship, their failure to smoke pot in college, their deep-seated religious beliefs, and/or their association with any right-leaning person or organization. Rather than a debate over qualifications and judicial philosophy, it was an official public beat-down.
True liberals, in my memory, were not oppressively collective-minded. The liberals I remember from the ’70’s and ’80’s were free-thinkers, widely read, and open to ideas, albeit biased toward the new and different. And despite heated debates they didn’t hate me; rather, they liked me because I have a curious mind and because I liked them. We had mutual respect for each other’s role in the world. I still respect different political approaches and opinions. I don’t like being lock-step with any political party; I’m actually persuadable. So far, though, progressives don’t seem interested in dialogue, let alone persuasion.
It’s easier to understand if you say “circle jerk.”
Dnaxy – IMO an important philosophical difference is whether one believes that sin & evil exist, that God is the ultimate answer to human need, and that government – although instituted for human good and capable of doing good – is fallible and cannot change human nature.
Sorry to double comment.
Ray:
Note that I didn’t say that I thought that ONLY liberals were “reasonable and moral and kind.” I just said that at the time I thought that most or even all liberals had those characteristics. At this point, however, I find big holes in that theory, particularly the “reasonable” part of it. And the other parts, too. Moral? Not when a political fight is at stake, or on certain issues. Kind? Not to anyone on the right or who leaves the fold.
DNAXY asked questions I will attempt to answer:
As a former liberal (1991) turned conservative, I will attempt to answer but I will warn you it is complex thinking on my part and may be simpler than my thinking. A conservative (generally speaking – not the knee jerk redneck homophobes there is a distinction because those types hurt our cause) has two traits that moved them into the “will never be a liberal again” camp. 1) Conservatives are empathetic – yes there are liberals who say they have empathy and might 2) Conservatives have done the due diligence and understand that love requires boundaries. For example: People need to come through ports of entry – if they are allowed to GRAB A CHILD and come through the border and then we see in our DNA testing they are not the parent of the child and have them in a separate holding facility – and then Lutheran Immigration Refugee Services (LIRS) and AOC howls and complains about the so-called facilities and yet does nothing to help the facilities to make them better – they are not empathetic nor are they about doing due diligence. There is evil in the world and love requires honoring process and having boundaries. This is true with children. We need boundaries with our children.
Yes – Those who are prone to only submit to a religion (Islam or the religion of global warming) tend to not do due diligence to have MORE input and MORE complex thinking to compartmentalize and understand science, or human behavior. You see the Cathy Young’s of the world who has completely submitted to her feminist religion not doing the due diligence required to LISTEN to Jordan Peterson provide more input as to WHY women might be paid less on a macro level given a multi-varied analysis. Cathy was close minded. Just like those who submit to Islam are generally or any other 100% faith religions including global warming needing us all to remove CO2. CO2 is life but my friend will NOT hear that. If a hunter gatherer blindly follows and submits to another and doesn’t do the complex thinking required to find a better way with more input, thought and tests – they will never grow and self actualize to see that there might be better ways of living.
Yes – generally speaking we will always be about 50/50 because as each family has a hierarchy, each organization has a hierarchy there will always generally be a system where there are followers, lazy, the people who do the complex thinking taking in more input – etc. The Paul Krugmans of the world do not do the complex thinking – Conservatives have ALL heard the Paul Krugman’s world view repeatedly all through life. Liberals (the followers) do not usually get exposed to the conservatives point of view and if they get exposed to the redneck homophobe will cement themselves into a liberal camp believing they have heard a conservative when they haven’t. We have a higher level of thinking, have LOVE for all humanity, know that the green new deal is back breaking and will hurt everyone who is poor and middle class (just to alter the temperature .1 degree) and know that policies of allowing people to not come through ports of entry and simply come and be a citizen will END THIS COUNTRY. Love is having a process and having boundaries. We have to have boundaries.
With my daughters for example there is only one way for them to grow. Not for me to GIVE GIVE GIVE but for them to GROW by putting their own arms around their dreams and endeavors. To strive and be themselves. I had 1% influence. Then somehow they grew to love K-POP formed dance teams, won awards at the Memorial Auditorium in downtown Sacramento, CA and I could not be prouder. They didn’t do all of that because anything I did really but for what I didn’t do. I didn’t make them submit to my will. I loved them, fed them, gave them foundational principles that we continue to talk about today.
I could be off base with my thinking but it is what it is right now given my experiences here in the belly of the beast in Sacramento.
Who took in more input during Kavanaugh? Conservatives. Conservatives realized this could happen to any man that due process is required.
Who took in more input and was empathetic during Clarence Thomas? Conservatives.
DNAXY wrote:
It will always depend on the situation on the ground. Two examples:
People shifted towards conservatives when presented with the FACTS after 9/11.
People shifted towards conservative when presented with the disease of Ebola.
You have to always take in more facts. Leaders will always listen to suboordinates in every day life to take in information because if they do not the leaders will become irrelevant. Like Pelosi. Pelosi is not living in the real world, becoming irrelavant in her own party and does not see the crisis in front of her. Her party is fractured deeply.
You see the Cathy Young’s of the world who has completely submitted to her feminist religion not doing the due diligence required to LISTEN to Jordan Peterson provide more input as to WHY women might be paid less on a macro level given a multi-varied analysis.
I sent a copy of Peterson’s book to my Bernie bro daughter, expecting her to throw it away. Instead, she called me to tell me how much she loved it. Since then, she has gotten married and is due to have her first baby this weekend.
physicsguy wrote:
I see things differently. I think of EVERYONE. I do not think it is wise for anyone, daughters, family, country to have open borders because of the resulting human trafficking and evil that will persist. That isn’t fair nor righteous. A leftist simply did not do the due diligence required to see that many of the kids are not even their own kids. Or the Honduran mother gave $6,000 to a coyote (which went to drugs) and she split up her family to the shock and horror of the father and other children in the family. It wasn’t good for the U.S., the Hondurans, and my family to have Time magazine advocate for not having a process and vetting people and having them come through ports of entry. Same thing on ALL issues. It isn’t good to have 8-12 year old Congolese children mine for rare earth materials so that we can all virtue signal in our Prius believing we are saving the planet.
None of liberalism is good for everyone. None. It isn’t fair, moral or just.
Mike K wrote, “I sent a copy of Peterson’s book to my Bernie bro daughter, expecting her to throw it away. Instead, she called me to tell me how much she loved it. Since then, she has gotten married and is due to have her first baby this weekend.”
Congratulations !!! The most bestest thing!!!
This is why we have to continue trying to educate. The 50/50 will move to 60/40 (towards liberalism) because of academics and hollywood celebrities if we do not fight for our future and continue to change minds. It is an ever changing world with those who have become WOKE to conservatism dying off each year and the young needing to be educated. Turning Point USA is a great example of what we need even if they don’t do everything correct. Prager U is another great example.
Jordan Peterson might slip and ask Kavanaug to resign but by and large he is helping our cause with a higher order and level of thinking showing people that expression and communication is essential to the logos and we cannot ban speech simply because we disagree with it.
Other ways to differentiate generally between conservatism and lib/progressivism, IMO:
Conservative values: religion, family, local community, reason and facts, stability and survival of systems, long-term policy-based solutions, reasonable limitations. Realistic about human nature and solutions.
Liberal/progressive values: government, interest groups, animals/nature, emotion, addressing individuals’ perceived needs and suffering, immediate response/action, some steamroller logic that may lack limitation . Idealistic about human nature and solutions.
Hi Karen,
California has such a lack of governance so it all depends on how you apply the term government.
One of the hardest things I’ve ever done. It makes me a stranger to my old social circles culturally and I’m not sure what to do about that. I kept most friends, though I lost a notable few. But I can’t talk about politics much with the ones who stuck around, unless they were made after the change. If I do, I have to be careful so they don’t get what appears to me, to be very angry very quickly. I feel as though I must be constantly patient, always making sure my left wing friends can express most of their opinions, while I keep mine in check. I won’t explode at their opinions, but I worry and have seen them explode at mine. I mean, get very angry. This is worse than ever now with Trump. I’ve become a Trump supporter and that’s something unspeakable. I am afraid now I could lose books deals and readings. I am not kidding. I’m a writer and have a new book of poems out and there’s a risk it won’t be reviewed or will be pulled if people know my politics (Trump). It has happened to people. It’s so crazy, this whole thing, I mean it’s not like I support anything out of what is mainstream. This guy is the president. Meanwhile my friends insult, taunt and call him names daily, when I speak to them. Well, not all of them but many. When they find out I voted for him they still do this, though not quite as much. If they find out I voted for him. Again, it is easier to say I am not a Dem anymore or a leftist than to say I am actually a Trump supporter.
Now, there are exceptions and some people who are not like that. But it is difficult, each day when in public. I left the Bay Area and I think it’s better out here in Colorado, in the Denver area, but it is still a blue area.
I am gaining new friends over time. Mostly not people I know in person, but still.
Yes, I’m complaining and whining a bit, but yes, it is not easy! Sometimes that needs to be done.
This is funny: I was told that since I am a “white man” that I don’t know how terrible Trump is and how racist. This from a white woman… who I had just told that I supported Trump, after meeting her. I had also told her my father is hispanic and my mother Native, but I am the lightest person in the family and people think I am white so… but still, why should it matter? I told her since I let my guard down and she seemed moderate enough. So I became the evil white man very quickly. Truly strange!
That’s the thing, I can’t let my guard down too much. It may lead to difficult consequences.
What kind of spell this magic casts, remains invisible to me.
As I mentioned before, I cannot understand this. It makes no sense to me in terms of being or becoming an edified or virtuous man (human), and it leaves me emotionally stone cold, if not vaguely contemptuous.
Perhaps I am an outlier. Maybe, even descended from outliers in this regard; that is, with respect to what appears on the surface to be impulses felt by the bulk of humanity.
Nonetheless, if my views, preferences, and lack of desire to “circle dance” place me outside the magic circle, I am convinced that there are many, many, other Americans, most of whom are probably not completely descended of some stubborn and winnowed Colonial settler stock, and yet, who still find themselves in exactly the same place: outside with no desire to enter. And that would include me.
So although natural predispositions may have a role, I don’t attribute the sensibility to that.
In fact, anyone who has ever attended a high-school pep rally, and had it suddenly strike them that those around them were acting like mindless chimps, and that their behavior was a bit unbecoming and even unAmerican – in some historical model sense – probably stands somewhat outside the circle too.
On the other hand, maybe I should just never have seen Planet of the Apes when I was a boy.
Pingback:True but Forbidden 36: No Old Hippies and No New Hippies Reading Circles Either - American Digest
Pingback:The Circle Dance