Philosophy Forum

Read Topic
Reply

why do I keep seeing liberal people embracing Confucianism

Philosophy Forum
» General Discussion
» why do I keep seeing liberal people embracing Confucianism

Get Email Updates • Email this Topic • Print this Page

seriously I don't get this

perhaps you've met this kind of person before

they're a middle class liberal person but they embrace Confucianism by way of Sino- / Japano- / East Asian demonym-o- philia, a doctrine which in practice tends to have a character much like fascism

how do they resolve the cognitive dissonance

idk I noticed that most of these individuals are white males so attributing some instances of this internal contradiction to "yellow fever" seems reasonable and I know a number of cases where this is certainly true, like guys whose entire system of ethics AND epistemology proceeds directly from their testicles, but it can't cover all of them

what if they're not really proponents of liberalism, I can see how that could be true ... many so-called liberals are actually conservatives in disguise who are just as opposed to things like free speech as their overtly right-wing counterparts

the only difference is that they pretend to care about the environment and whatnot

idk thoughts?

@odenskrigare,

"demonym-o- philia"?

@odenskrigare,

yeah I'm not sure what "-philia" would go with every country where Confucianism holds sway so I just put something general

like what would you use for Korea

@odenskrigare,

odenskrigare;127791 wrote:

seriously I don't get this

perhaps you've met this kind of person before

they're a middle class liberal person but they embrace Confucianism by way of Sino- / Japano- / East Asian demonym-o- philia, a doctrine which in practice tends to have a character much like fascism

how do they resolve the cognitive dissonance

idk I noticed that most of these individuals are white males so attributing some instances of this internal contradiction to "yellow fever" seems reasonable and I know a number of cases where this is certainly true, like guys whose entire system of ethics AND epistemology proceeds directly from their testicles, but it can't cover all of them

what if they're not really proponents of liberalism, I can see how that could be true ... many so-called liberals are actually conservatives in disguise who are just as opposed to things like free speech as their overtly right-wing counterparts

the only difference is that they pretend to care about the environment and whatnot

idk thoughts?

In the case of the kinds of people you are talking about I would suppose that the lure of Confucianism is: 1. it is not American and, therefore, not associated with everything evil. 2. it is from the mysterious East, and since most of them are ignorant of what goes on there, they find it attractive.

@odenskrigare,

well idk man even a lot of the guys who go to an Asian country and quickly find themselves a self-abasing bride persist in their error

so

idk

I mean to be fair Confucius did support something like what we would now call a "welfare state" but the thing is that European countries do a far far better job of that kind of thing

@odenskrigare,

Are you trying to make some general point about what you call 'liberalism'?

@odenskrigare,

not really

I mean I consider myself a leftist or more precisely a left libertarian

this thread is really more about how I'm puzzled at middle class white wankers who call themselves liberals embracing a protofascist ideology

it's about inconsistency

@odenskrigare,

I agree about the inconsistency. My impression is that most liberals are moral relativists (I think perhaps "non-cognitivists" might be a more correct jargon term?), whereas my own liberalism seems to have been founded (for a long time, but I think not for the whole of my life) on an intuitive moral realism - which I have a hell of a time converting into a coherent and explicit philosophy, and which seems to imply, or rather seems to require me to develop, a kind of theism, even though I started from an atheistic perspective.

@odenskrigare,

odenskrigare;127831 wrote:

not really

I mean I consider myself a leftist or more precisely a left libertarian

this thread is really more about how I'm puzzled at middle class white wankers who call themselves liberals embracing a protofascist ideology

it's about inconsistency

But Liberals do that kind of thing all the time. For instance, take their complete support of Islamics like the Taliban who don't even want women to learn to read, and who stone to death women who have been raped, although they claim to support women's rights too. What could be more inconsistent, and evil, than that?

But I think I am indeed suggesting a general point about left-liberals.

@kennethamy,

All liberals completely support the Taliban? You must have some funny liberals round where you live. I would get out of there as soon as possible!

@odenskrigare,

odenskrigare;127791 wrote:

seriously I don't get this

perhaps you've met this kind of person before

they're a middle class liberal person but they embrace Confucianism by way of Sino- / Japano- / East Asian demonym-o- philia, a doctrine which in practice tends to have a character much like fascism

how do they resolve the cognitive dissonance

idk I noticed that most of these individuals are white males so attributing some instances of this internal contradiction to "yellow fever" seems reasonable and I know a number of cases where this is certainly true, like guys whose entire system of ethics AND epistemology proceeds directly from their testicles, but it can't cover all of them

what if they're not really proponents of liberalism, I can see how that could be true ... many so-called liberals are actually conservatives in disguise who are just as opposed to things like free speech as their overtly right-wing counterparts

the only difference is that they pretend to care about the environment and whatnot

idk thoughts?

I'm not seeing enough in your post to substantiate your shared thoughts, leaving my own conclusion to be the strong possiblity that your own conclusion about so called liberal people embracing Confucianism as perhaps incorrect.

Lost1

@Twirlip,

Twirlip;127890 wrote:

All liberals completely support the Taliban? You must have some funny liberals round where you live. I would get out of there as soon as possible!

I didn't say all. But there is a general support, among the left, of Islamic fascism, since they are not Western, and not white, and not American. And, when they don't support them, they blame them on America.

@kennethamy,

Without knowing how to define it (which might properly be a topic for a thread in the Philosophy of Politics forum, if there is not such a thread there already), I have always, through thick and thin, thought it very obvious that there is a distinct political personality called "liberal", and two other distinct political personalities called "Left" and "Right".

Of course it is also extremely obvious that this tripartite division of a complex reality is not hard-and-fast, nor is it the only axis along which individual political personality can vary; nevertheless there is such an axis, which is permanent, or at least extremely long-lived (centuries), within the context of Western civilisation as a whole.

It has also always seemed obvious to me that those on the Left have a strong tendency to assimilate liberalism to the Right, and to hate liberals even more than they hate the Right, because (a) liberalism blurs the boundary and therefore seems to threaten betrayal from within, and because (b) the two wings have an affinity for each other which they do not share with the centre; and ditto for Right and Left, mutatis mutandi.

Also obvious is that there is more a sense of this tripartite nature of this dimension of the political continuum on this side of the Atlantic, and less on yours, for obvious institutional reasons (there are two "main" political parties in the US, and three "main" parties in the UK - with, however, the centre being rather less "main" than the other two, and indeed the other two being all but indistinguishable from one another!).

That is all a long and roundabout way of saying that I find your identification of "liberal" and "left" to be an oversimplification: very useful, no doubt, in particular contexts, but highly confusing if adopted across the board.

As I said, I have no idea how define properly any of the terms I am using, nor how to substantiate any of the statements I have made; but for me, one good use of a philosophy forum might be to learn how to do just that. (Just not in this thread, I think.)

---------- Post added 02-13-2010 at 06:01 PM ----------

P.S. I do not mean to imply that it would be possible, even in principle, to enunciate precise definitions of "Left" and "Right" which would clarify every discourse in which they occur. In fact, do not believe that that is the case (although life would be much simpler if it were). Clarification of how language is used does not lead in every case to a set of logical definitions which could be used to create a purer and more logical language for discussing the same matters (leading one to wonder why, in that case, our actual language was not pure and logical like that in the first place).

@Twirlip,

Twirlip;127907 wrote:

two being all but indistinguishable from one another!).

That is all a long and roundabout way of saying that I find your identification of "liberal" and "left" to be an oversimplification: very useful, no doubt, in particular contexts, but highly confusing if adopted across the board.

I don't think I assimilated them. I just called them "Left-Liberal". And they do not form a monolith. There are, of course, gradations. The extreme, on the Left, is intolerable, and is a great danger to this country. You know who it is I mean.Move On, and the various organizations associated with it.

@kennethamy,

I'd never heard of Move On:

MoveOn.org: Democracy in Action

At first sight, they don't look very Stalinist or Maoist to me. If that's your idea of the Hard Left, you must have led a very sheltered life! Or are you claiming that they are a front organisation?

@Twirlip,

Twirlip;127935 wrote:

I'd never heard of Move On:

MoveOn.org: Democracy in Action

At first sight, they don't look very Stalinist or Maoist to me. If that's your idea of the Hard Left, you must have led a very sheltered life! Or are you claiming that they are a front organisation?

They are the hard left, or close to it, in America.

@kennethamy,

Is this what they call "grading on the curve"?

@Twirlip,

Twirlip;127949 wrote:

Is this what they call "grading on the curve"?

We were talking about America. Move On is part of the American extreme left. Are they Maoists? Perhaps some are. I would not be surprised. But, they are bad enough.

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;127950 wrote:

We were talking about America.

Now you've lost me. Are you saying that political concepts stop short at national boundaries, and in particular, to put it crudely (but adequately for this discussion), the Left-liberal-Right axis cannot be meaningfully calibrated except with respect to the population of a single country, and no meaningful comparison is possible as to how Left-wing or Right-wing a person in one country is as compared to someone in another country? It is hard for me to imagine how that could possibly be the case, and yet the terms "Left" and "Right" could still retain any meaning for comparing the political complexions of individuals in one country. (It would be different if you were saying that they are altogether meaningless.) Can you explain this?

@odenskrigare,

odenskrigare;127791 wrote:

seriously I don't get this

perhaps you've met this kind of person before

they're a middle class liberal person but they embrace Confucianism by way of Sino- / Japano- / East Asian demonym-o- philia, a doctrine which in practice tends to have a character much like fascism

how do they resolve the cognitive dissonance

idk I noticed that most of these individuals are white males so attributing some instances of this internal contradiction to "yellow fever" seems reasonable and I know a number of cases where this is certainly true, like guys whose entire system of ethics AND epistemology proceeds directly from their testicles, but it can't cover all of them

what if they're not really proponents of liberalism, I can see how that could be true ... many so-called liberals are actually conservatives in disguise who are just as opposed to things like free speech as their overtly right-wing counterparts

the only difference is that they pretend to care about the environment and whatnot

idk thoughts?

I suppose it's easy to wear an import as fashion, neglecting its real meaning. I knew a junky once who loved to reference Buddhism, for instance. Sure, he was getting some "nirvana," but not from Buddhism.

Yes, some that are called liberals are not fond of liberty. Progressive liberals tend to side against individual liberty, like the freedom of speech. Just as you mentioned. I also agree that environmental concerns are generally fashion statements. So few liberals or conservatives will risk more than a little disposable income which is a small price to pay for "aesthetic consonance" (a twist on cognitive dissonance) with their peers. Keep the lawn mowed. Buy a Prius. Meanwhile invest your retirement in questionable corporations. Call me cynical, but I think most humans of every class put self and family far above more abstract considerations. That environmentalism is a laudable fashion is probably good for the environment though.

Also, I'm not playing the role of the activist here. I'm not saying these people are wrong for being selfish.

Philosophy Forum
» General Discussion
» why do I keep seeing liberal people embracing Confucianism

Read Topic
Reply

Philosophy Forum

why do I keep seeing liberal people embracing Confucianism

Quick Links

My Account

able2know