How Liberal Democracy Becomes Woke Tyranny
Summary
TLDRThis video script explores the ideological connections and distinctions between Marxism, liberalism, and Nazism, emphasizing the latter's exclusion from the former two's anthropological views. It delves into the paradox of liberalism, highlighting its inherent contradictions and its struggle to maintain homogeneity while advocating for diversity. The discussion also touches on the foundational thinkers of classical liberalism—Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau—and their impact on contemporary political ideologies, including the influence on democratic institutions and the concept of the 'general will.' The speaker critiques the liberal state's tendency to act illiberal to preserve democracy and the implications of this for individual freedoms and societal cohesion.
Takeaways
- 🧠 The speaker argues that there's a connection between Marxist and liberal views on human nature, while Nazism is seen as an outlier.
- 🔗 The Nazis are often incorrectly equated with those who don't subscribe to a blank slate view of human nature, which is a common belief among both liberals and Marxists.
- 🗣️ The liberal state faces a paradox where it must act illiberal to protect democracy from those labeled as 'Nazis', as explained by German legal scholar ER Wolfgang Bucken.
- 🤔 The liberal state's premise is that it can only exist in a homogeneous society where individual freedoms are regulated internally, yet it struggles to ensure this homogeneity without compromising liberalism.
- 🏛️ Classical liberalism's forefathers, such as Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau, are examined, with their differing views on human nature and the state's role in society.
- 🌱 Hobbes is noted for his belief in a strong, centralized state to prevent the 'war of all against all', contrasting with Locke's and Rousseau's more optimistic views of human nature.
- 🏡 Locke's philosophy emphasizes individual self-ownership and the state's role in ensuring freedom and equality, which can lead to state intervention in private institutions.
- 🌱 Rousseau is seen as a proto-Marxist with his belief in an egalitarian state of nature and the corrupting influence of civilization, leading to the need for a new political order.
- 🔄 The script suggests that democracy, as defined by the Enlightenment and liberalism, is about revealing and expressing man's free and equal nature, which is threatened by those who don't believe in this uniform nature.
- 🌐 The speaker critiques the idea that democracy is under threat from divisive populists who are seen as preventing the realization of a utopian, egalitarian society.
Q & A
What is the main argument against equating non-Marxist or non-liberal anthropological views with Nazism?
-The main argument is that the Nazis represent an extreme and distinct ideology that should not be conflated with other non-Marxist or non-liberal views. It's a misrepresentation to equate any belief that doesn't adhere to the 'blank slate' theory with Nazism, as it oversimplifies and mischaracterizes the complexity of political and philosophical thought.
How does the liberal state reconcile acting illiberal against those labeled as 'Nazis' to preserve democracy?
-The liberal state justifies such actions by claiming that it is necessary to protect the core values of democracy from those who would undermine them. This is based on the premise that certain beliefs or ideologies pose a threat to the democratic order, and thus, the state must take measures to safeguard its foundational principles.
What is the paradox presented by German legal scholar ER Wolfgang Buckenmüller?
-Buckenmüller's paradox is that the liberal secular state relies on premises it cannot guarantee by itself. It requires a homogeneous society for its moral substance, yet it cannot enforce homogeneity without renouncing liberalism. This creates a dilemma for the state as it tries to balance the need for internal regulation with the liberal value of diversity and individual freedom.
How does the script connect Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau to the development of classical liberalism?
-The script connects Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau by discussing their views on human nature and the state. Hobbes is noted for his belief in a strong, centralized state to prevent the 'war of all against all.' Locke is recognized for his emphasis on individual self-ownership and the state's role in protecting property rights. Rousseau is acknowledged for his idea of the 'general will' and the notion that humans are naturally good and become corrupted by societal institutions.
What is the 'state of nature' according to Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau?
-Hobbes describes the state of nature as a 'war of all against all,' driven by the desire for conquest and the avoidance of death. Locke sees it as a state of material privation but with free and equal individuals, while Rousseau views it as a state of material abundance where human greed leads to inequality and conflict.
How does the script explain the role of the state in liberal anthropology, particularly in relation to children and education?
-The script suggests that in liberal anthropology, the state has a role in ensuring that children's natural egalitarian consciousness can flourish. This may involve reducing parental influence over children to prevent the imposition of non-egalitarian values, as seen in the Biden Administration's stance on parental involvement in education and the trans lobby's approach to gender identity.
What is the difference between Locke's and Rousseau's views on the role of the state in society?
-Locke's view is that the state's primary role is to protect property and individual rights, which necessitates checks and balances to prevent state overreach. Rousseau, on the other hand, sees the state as a means to return humans to their natural, egalitarian state, emphasizing the 'general will' and the collective good over individual property rights.
How does Rousseau's concept of the 'general will' relate to his political philosophy?
-Rousseau's 'general will' is the collective rational self-interest of all individuals, which is always right and tends towards the public utility. It is the mechanism by which humans can be returned to their natural state of equality and freedom. The 'general will' is seen as infallible when proper procedures are followed, and it is central to Rousseau's vision of a political order that balances protection, order, freedom, and equality.
What does the script suggest about the relationship between democracy and the concept of the 'blank slate' in human nature?
-The script suggests that democracy, as understood in the context of the 'blank slate' theory, is about revealing and expressing man's free and equal nature in identical fashion. A threat to democracy, in this view, is a threat to the belief in an egalitarian nature that should lead to uniform choices and behaviors, which is a core tenet of both Enlightenment liberalism and Marxism.
How does the script characterize the role of divisive rhetoric and populism in democracy?
-The script characterizes divisive rhetoric and populism as forces that lead people away from their natural, egalitarian choices. It suggests that these elements create a false consciousness that disrupts the uniformity of decision-making that should occur in a true democracy, where all individuals are believed to have identical interests and nature.
Outlines
📚 The Paradox of Liberalism and Its Critics
This paragraph delves into the ideological connection between Marxist and liberal views on human nature, contrasting them with Nazi beliefs. It critiques the tendency to equate non-Marxist or non-liberal views with Nazism as an oversimplification. The speaker discusses the paradox faced by liberal states in maintaining democracy while acting against those deemed 'Nazi', referencing German legal scholar ER Wolfgang Bucken's work. The paradox is that liberal states rely on a homogeneous society's inner moral regulation yet cannot guarantee this regulation without potentially renouncing liberalism. The narrative also touches on how liberal states handle diversity and the inherent contradictions within liberal ideology, including the works of James Burnham and Patrick Denine, and the influence of classical liberal thinkers like Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau.
🏛️ The Evolution of Liberalism and Its Impact on Society
Paragraph 2 examines the evolution of liberal thought from its classical roots in the works of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau. It discusses how each philosopher's views on human nature and the state of nature influenced the development of liberal institutions. Hobbes is noted for his belief in a strong state to mediate human conflict, while Locke and Rousseau are recognized for their ideas on individual freedom and equality. The paragraph also explores how liberal principles have been implemented in modern society, particularly in the areas of education and gender identity, leading to controversies over parental rights and the influence of expert opinions. The discussion extends to the similarities and differences between liberal and Marxist approaches to wealth generation and distribution, suggesting that both ideologies share a common end goal but differ in their methods.
🗳️ Democracy and the General Will: Rousseau's Philosophy
In this paragraph, the focus is on Rousseau's political philosophy, particularly his concept of the 'general will' and its role in democracy. Rousseau's view is that humans are naturally good and that societal institutions corrupt this goodness. He proposes that by returning to a more natural state, humans can achieve a harmonious existence. The paragraph discusses Rousseau's idea of the general will as an infallible expression of the public good, contingent on proper procedures and informed decision-making by the populace. It also touches on Rousseau's distrust of 'learned men' and orators who could sway the populace away from their innate, rational choices. The paragraph concludes by connecting Rousseau's philosophy to contemporary debates about democracy, suggesting that threats to democracy are often perceived as threats to the underlying assumptions of equality and sameness inherent in Enlightenment thought.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Marxist
💡Liberal
💡Blank Slate
💡Anthropology
💡Leviathan
💡State of Nature
💡Liberal State
💡Hobbes
💡Locke
💡Rousseau
💡General Will
Highlights
The assertion that there is a connective tissue between Marxist and liberal understandings of human nature, contrasting with Nazi ideology.
Critique of equating non-Marxist or non-liberal anthropological views with Nazism.
Discussion on the paradox of the liberal state acting illiberal to preserve democracy.
Reference to German legal scholar ER Wolfgang Bucken's views on the liberal secular state's inherent contradictions.
Analysis of the liberal state's reliance on homogeneous societal values to regulate freedom.
Critique of liberalism's inability to guarantee its own premises without renouncing liberalism.
James Burnham's quote on liberalism as the ideology of Western suicide.
Finley's examination of the three main forefathers of classical liberalism: Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau.
Hobbes' view on the necessity of an absolute sovereign to mediate conflicts.
Locke's belief in the individual's right to self-ownership and the state's role in ensuring it.
Rousseau's argument that material conditions, not personal relations, drive conflict.
The concept of the 'general will' as a means to return humans to an egalitarian state of nature.
Rousseau's idea that human beings are naturally good and institutions make them wicked.
The notion that democracy is a system revealing man's free and equal nature through identical choices.
Critique of divisive rhetoric and its impact on the democratic process.
The idea that democracy is under threat from those who don't agree with the 'blank slate' anthropology.
The importance of supporting Lotus.com for more in-depth analysis and discussions.
Transcripts
there is connected tissue between the
Marxist and the liberal understanding of
human nature the Nazis are completely
outside of that and so anyone who is not
a Marxist or a liberal in their
anthropology who doesn't believe in the
blank slate is therefore improperly
equated with the Nazis because again
hello hope not hate for watching no I'm
not a Nazi I'm not a 1930s German it's
really tiresome but democratism
liberalism and the marxists who nip at
its heels all the time either don't or
will y won't understand that and they're
both going in the same direction so this
is how the liberal State can square the
circle of acting illiberal against
people that calls Nazis to preserve
democracy otherwise it encounters the
Paradox put forward by a German legal
scholar ER Wulf gang bucken Fedder and
he wrote the liberal secular State lives
on premises that it cannot guarantee by
itself on one side it can subsist only
if the freedom it consents to its
citizens is regulated from within inside
the moral substance of individuals of a
homogeneous society on the other side it
is not able to guarantee these forces of
inner regulation a homogeneous society
without itself renouncing liberalism so
it can't act on behalf of an ingr
preference of one particular conception
of the good of one particular people of
a culture of religion of a history and
so it allows All Peoples from anywhere
to make contact with
its educational institutions and its
material prosperity in the hopes that
they will be converted to egalitarian
liberalism and so it relies on certain
truths being self-evident to certain
peoples like the homogeneous Christian
Englishmen of the of the American
founding fathers that are not as
self-evident to other people but it
can't admit they're not self-evident
because otherwise it admits that there
are competing conceptions of the good
there is a friend enemy distinction that
there are insurmountable barriers to
certain people or even certain peoples
different nations different cultures
different tribes I think there a good
word to use it um just believing what we
all believe so
it can't guarantee its own success this
is why James Burnham said
liberalism is the ideology of Western
suicide so back to
Finley I know it's a big charge to level
at liberalism but I think Finley
retraces these steps very well as does
Patrick Denine in his first book why
liberalism failed I haven't read regime
change yet I know it has some strange
findings about doubling the size of
Congress maybe I'll cover Denine at some
point we'll be good to chat to him
actually eventually but anyway I'm
getting ahead of myself so Finley looks
at the three main forefathers of
Classical liberalism she admits montue
in her book by the way but she looks at
Hobbs Lo and rouso and draw some
connective tissue we already mentioned
Hobs here in relation to Schmidt but her
summary of Hobs is that Hobbs obviously
believed in an all-encompassing
Leviathan state with an absolute
Sovereign Mona his head and the only
means by which conflicts could be
mediated was this state the the Bellum
omum Contra omnes the war of all against
all only the Leviathan could stop him
and that war of all Against All Is Man's
state of nature so he establishes the
idea of the state of nature he doesn't
agree on its conditions with lock and
rouso who essentially are in agreement
that it's a kind of Garden of Eden
narrative um Lo believed the state of
nature was one of material privation but
that men were free and equal rouso
believed it was one of material
abundance and that man's internal greed
rendered him away from freedom of
equality freedom and equality into a
kind of War of all against all and the
institutions were set up to mediate this
and you just need sufficiently good
institutions to put man back in theate
nature but anyway hobbs' anthropology
was that man was driven by libido
dominandi the desire for conquest and
the avoidance of death so subjugating
the population's competing conceptions
of the good to The Sovereign to quote
reduce all their Wills by plurality of
voices onto one will which is as much to
say to appoint one man or assembly of
men to Bear their person seems to be the
origin idea of Representative governance
within liberalism so Hobbs even though
he has disagreements with local Russo
has connected tissue to the Democratic
institutions that were birthed out of
liberalism and the anthropology of
liberalism that lock and Russo later
built on so on lock Lo believed the
quote individual's primary source of
rights is his or her right to self-
ownership so any limit to self-governing
Authority must have its influence
reduced so that sets up a mandate for
the liberal state to intervene in
private social institutions that can be
defined as infringing on your rights for
example child is not actually Born Free
and equal they're born in extric
dependent on their parents they're in a
state of dependence so what we have to
do is have a moral framework that puts
the obligation of the parent to act as
if the child could have chosen and
therefore they best be the best possible
parent so the child would have chosen
them if they could have instead if the
liberal anthropology is that we're all
free and equal If the child is
inextricably dependent then it becomes
the role of the state to reduce the
influence of the parents over the child
to allow the child's natural egalitarian
Consciousness to flourish this is why
you get the Biden Administration coming
in and saying parents are not the
primary stakeholders in their children's
education this is why you get the trans
Lobby coming and crowbar away their
child from the parents who are skeptical
of their child's sudden gender
transition and giving them to a glitter
family of appointed LGBT experts instead
who can reveal their true gendered
Consciousness from the false one that is
imposed upon them by a gender binary
Society
this all flows Downstream from the
individual will concept of liberalism
and this is how certain Marxist
theorists have played with these ideas
but these theories haven't been
successful in explicitly Marxist
societies like Venezuela or the USSR or
Nicaragua etc
etc lock wrote as well the chief end of
civil society is the preservation of
property so then we only need to
generate abundance which is privation
that's a reason why we left the state of
nature in the first place in order to
allow the state to take up the business
of reverting us to the state of nature
to ensure that no compromise between
freedom or equality is needed to ensure
that man is not just subsisting and
trying to Stave off starvation illness
and death if we have the means to get
past those with the technological power
of the Scientific Revolution and liberal
political Enlightenment then suddenly
the business of the state becomes
returning us to the state of nature and
so Lo's liberalism actually only really
differs from Marxism in its means of
generating and redistributing wealth but
if a button were to be pressed tomorrow
and we had the Communist Utopia Lock's
liberal compromises wouldn't be
necessary and he couldn't argue against
it and so you get protom Marxist rouso
coming out of the liberal tradition and
I know lots of people have contested the
idea that lusso is a liberal but and we
went over this on our rip 10 at media um
culture War podcast with Phil leonti and
Tim Paul on liberalism actually Russo's
Romanticism as Finley writes in
here has connective tissue with the
rationalism of the other liberal
thinkers so she writes while rouso
challenges many of the enlightenment's
assumptions he ultimately shares its
fundamental epistemology his emphasis on
radical autonomy supported by a socially
atomistic anthropology is largely
consistent with Enlightenment
voluntarism and rationalism so his
belief that human beings have an
egalitarian state of nature that can be
revealed by throwing off the shackles of
civilization is similar to the
antagonistic relationship that locks
anthropology sets up with the
institutions of the state and with
culture I mean the individual in the
state always exist in conflict in locks
anthropology this is why the loan
inspired American founding fathers put
checks and balances on the state because
they didn't want them to infringe on the
rights of the individual but these were
only
necessary because property needed to be
guaranteed if you can develop a
abundance of property and that no longer
needs to be negotiated then the state is
Obsolete and Mankind will come to the
same conclusion over and over right so
it doesn't matter whether or not they do
this through emotional reasoning per
Russo or rational reasoning through Lo
the end destination is still the same
Russo's novel contribution was to
propose a political philosophy that
provide the protection and Order
promised by Leviathan while preserving
Lo's notion of individual freedom and
also equality according to Finley in the
social contract R writes men are not
naturally enemies for the simple reason
that men living in their original state
of Independence do not have sufficiently
con constant relationships among
themselves to bring about either a state
of peace or a state of War it is a
relationship between things and not that
between men that brings about war and
this state of War cannot come into
existence from simple personal relations
but only from real relations in this
sense Russo anticipates Marx's
philosophy as historical materialism
binarily entury basically the material
iniquities cause conflict rather than
the innate tendency for man to be fallen
and capricious and emotional and so
relationships between people don't cause
conflict only not enough stuff does
external that is material conditions
Drive the acquisitive and self centered
impulse in the second discourse on
equality Russo says the first person who
having enclosed a plot of land took it
into his head to say this is mine and
found people simple enough to believe
him was the true founder of Civil
Society It Is by accident that human
natural goodness degenerates historical
circumstances and social institutions
however need not affect human
flourishing altering the way in which a
human being assembles in a community can
to a great extent restore our original
goodness Russo believes and then
perpetuate this through the new
political order this is the idea of the
general will in Russo's mind procedures
are part of the ideal of the general
will and are in some ways Inseparable s
substance quote the general will is
always right Russo says and always tends
towards the public
utility so long as the procedures to
enact it are followed in the absence of
a proper procedure the general will is
impossible so the general will is the
infallible action in the presumed
rational self-interest of all human
beings with an identical nature so the
general will is the means of returning
human beings to their egalitarian state
of nature it was at this moment Russo
recalls that he realized the key to his
political philosophy quote that man is
naturally good and that it is from our
institutions alone that men become
Wicked end quote it is because of our
underlying natural goodness he believes
that we are all capable of participating
in the general will quote if when a
sufficiently informed populist
deliberates Russo says the citizens were
to have no communication among
themselves the general will would always
result from the large number of small
differences and the deliberation would
always be good the two criteria the
populace be sufficiently informed and
the citizens abstain from communication
constitute what might be considered the
Republican and Democratic elements in
Russo's philosophy the general will one
of the reasons that Russo distrusts
quote learned men and orators is their
tendency to lead us away from this Inner
Voice through refined language and
sophistry quote Man's first language the
most universal the most energetic and
the only language he needed before it
was necessary to persuade men assembled
together is the Cry of nature
AKA if you leave men alone they will
make identical choices it's just culture
it's just the whispering of bad faith
actors populists pedaling their divisive
rhetoric that priz them apart from
making the same reliable Progressive
conclusion
and so democracy is an exercise in
everyone making identical Choice over
and over again the only reason they
wouldn't make that choice voting for
Biden voting for Kamala voting for
Labour voting for The Green Party in
Germany the only reason they wouldn't
make their choice is because of divisive
racist populists like Trump the
afd Migel frage coming in stoking
Division and giving them a false
consciousness that makes them think
they're actually not equal they're
actually not identical and rendering
them them away from the Utopia that is
just always Within Reach but snatched
away from them are those divisive
populists with awful agendas those evil
office who might suggest that there
might be competing conceptions of the
good that the giant Global State can't
just make go away by ensuring everyone
plays nice so democracy this is a
definition I've come up with having red
Finley democracy when they say threat
democracy means something like the
system by which Man's Free and equal
nature is revealed to him and expressed
in identical
fashion
democracy is returning man to the state
of nature so a threat democracy means a
threat to the blank slate it means a
threat to the anthropology of the
Enlightenment of liberalism and Marxism
alike it means a threat to our ability
the ruling political media and Academia
Elite
to administer the minds of men to tell
them they have an egalitarian nature
that they should be making the same
Choice over and over and to put on Rails
politics with certain policies and
agendas that is presumed to be in
everyone's
self-interest democracy is under threat
from people that don't agree that we all
want exactly the same thing because
we're all fundamentally the same at a
biological
theological ideological
level it's the blank slate enacted
through political mechanisms thank you
for watching that clip from Tom Linson
talks if you liked that and you would
like to see more you can get the full
90minut show every week on a Wednesday
afternoon live from 3 pm only on
lotus.com and all of the other content
that my colleagues produce behind the
paywall for as little as5 a month thank
you very much for supporting us and I
hope to see you there until next time
goodbye
[Music]
[Music]
Посмотреть больше похожих видео
Unit 1 Intro to Ideologies - Lesson 4: What Does Liberalism Mean
Unit 4 Liberal Politics - Lesson 1: Intro to Political Liberalism
What is Government
What is Communism? | Success and Failures of Communism | Dhruv Rathee
Hobbes vs. Locke vs. Rousseau - Social Contract Theories Compared
A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing - Theological Liberalism: The Classic Collection with R.C. Sproul
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)