An on-going Town Hall Meeting!
Topic: Class war, Culture war, or Holy war?
We all saw the fractious and unruly town hall meetings during the health insurance reform debate. The country really seems strongly divided. My question is:
“What is the primary axis on which the US people are divided?” Is it liberals vs conservatives? Neo-conservatives vs neo-liberals? Rich vs poor? Religious vs secular? Young vs old?
The following list explores one axis of the current cultural polarization in the USA.
(Feel free to suggest additions or revisions to the pairs of opposites.)
| AUTHORITARIAN | EGALITARIAN |
| Anachronistic | Contemporary |
| Religion | Science |
| Belief | Knowledge |
| Faith | Proof |
| Certainty | Probability & Ambiguity |
| Revelation | Reason |
| Divine Creation | Emerging Self Organization (evolution) |
| Divine Right of King | Human Rights |
| Fundamentalism | Skepticism |
| Conservative | Progressive |
| Orthodoxy | Consensus |
| Conformity | Cooperation |
| Obedience | Informed Consent |
| Dogma | Fee thought |
| Censorship | Free Speech |
| Propaganda | Information Quality |
| Tribalism | Community |
| Pecking Order | Peer to Peer |
| Follow the Leader | Do the Right Thing |
| Law of the Jungle | Golden Rule |
| Sociopaths | Social Workers |
| Top Down | Bottom Up |
| Rule of Men | Rule of Law |
| Trickle Down | Rising Tide |
| Centralized | Distributed |
| Predation | Cultivation |
| Dominion | Stewardship |
| Plunder | Development |
| Dictate | Negotiate |
| Might Makes Right | Power Corrupts |
| Ends Justify Means | Uniform Justice |
| Secrecy | Honesty |
| Expedience | Ethics |
| Caviat Emptor | Consumer Protection |
| Taboo | Tolerance |
| Shame | Compassion |
| Exclusion | Inclusion |
| Rejection | Empathy |
| Condemnation | Forgiveness |
| Intimidation | Inspiration |
| Imitation | Creativity |
| Conformity | Mutualism |
| Accusation | Evidence |
| Punishment | Restitution, rehabilitation |
| Indoctrination | Education |
| Competition | Cooperation |
| Selfishness | Enlightened self-interest |
| Torture | Nurture |
| Corruption | Accountability |
| Favoritism | Impartiality |
| Empire | Federation |
| Global Monoculture | Bio-Regional Diversity |
| Nationalism | Internationalism |
| Xenophobia | Multiculturalism |
| Racism | Brotherhood of Man |
| Chauvinism | Inclusion |
| De-humanization | Humanism |
| Lying, Cheating | Honor |
| Stealing | Sharing |
| Monolithic Purity | Diversity |
| Repetition | Innovation |
| Bully | Mentor |
| Mean Spirit | Do no harm |
| Authority | Decency |
| Arrogance | Humility |
| Greed | Generosity |
| Gluttony | Moderation |
| Humiliation | Dignity |
| Violence | Non-violence |
| War | Peace |
| Takers[1] | Leavers[1] |
| Breakers [2] | Keepers, Fixers, Healers [2] |
Table Notes:
[1] From the 1992 novel Ishmael by Daniel Quinn.
[2] From Creating a world that works for all by Dr. Sharif Abdullah, Commonway.org
Most of the items on either side of the list are things that seem to be deeply embedded in humans, things that seem fairly intractable to change. Where you are on the axis is pretty much where you’ve always been and will always stay. These aren’t things people tend to be very flexible about, are they?
ARE THERE TWO SUB-SPECIES OF HUMANITY?
Coming of age in the highly polarized sixties left me with a lifelong curiosity about how a modern society could be so divided in the ways people understood the facts of life, history and reality. In the days of Jonathan Swift‘s Gulliver’s Travels, the state of human knowledge, science, education, printing, etc. might easily explain a great deal of divergence among beliefs and opinions. But one hardly finds any credible explanation surviving into modern times other than some kind of genetic distinction, the popular culture having become so homogeneous and ubiquitous nowadays.
But still faced with a seemingly irreparable schism in our population fifty years on, I am personally inclined to see the advantages of an all out war like the one in the Bhagavad Gita to settle the conflict once and for all. Of course, some scholars see the Gita as an allegory in which the war takes place not between multiple combatants but between different aspects within an individual soul.
Likewise, what I have characterized as two subspecies of humanity may both exist as polarities, like good and evil, or fear and courage, within every individual. I dare say there must be some truth to that, but I don’t think it helps to solve the problem without a war. After all, most of us seem to be choosing up sides pretty unambiguously thanks to catalysts such as Fox News.
If the masses are so passionately divided, who should deny them the satisfaction of a goode olde holy-cultural-evolutionary war? At the very least we should franchise a Culture Fight Club in every town– a place where conflicts between class, culture, religion, etc. could be settled by personal combat. In this age of Cable TV and the Internet, when each person is entitled to his or her own personal facts, how else are we going to settle arguments?
One solution to the cluture war, if in fact it were a clash between two genetic phenotypes that I call the authoritarians and egalitarians, would be for one side of the conflict to humanely sterilize the other. This would be fine for the authoritarians but alas, the egalitarians don’t allow for the ends to justify the means. Our hands are kind of tied from any direct way of actually destroying the authoritarian gene pool.
But for the conscientious objectors among us, what if the coming environmental “perfect storm”, which might destroy a substantial part of the human population, gave one sub-species the opportunity to just survive better than the other? We tend to see authoritarians as survivors, but are they always? What if survival depends on the ability to change ones interior point of view rather than controlling external conditions?
What if the surviving authoritarians were to enclose themselves tightly within their own defensive perimeters on dwindling patches of prime real estate, leaving most of the planet to the rest of us? What if the meek were to inherit the earth simply as a result of superior preparation, mainly in the form of already being used to applying appropriate manual skill sets on marginal property?
There may be an important opportunity hidden in any environmental apocalypse that might occur. Who knows what will actually happen–but if there should be a drastic depopulation it could be turned into an opportunity by whoever was best prepared for it.
Also, I am pointing out that there may indeed be a materialistic logic behind the old and ubiquitous prophesy that the meek shall inherit the earth. If the meek were those who were already adapted to minimal subsistence, they might also be best adapted to a collapse of civilization, especially any part of civilization that is heavily dependent on unsustainable technology and infrastructure. In this case the “should” need come from no more than the wish to survive. (Some may actually prefer not to.)
To participate in this on-going Town Hall Meeting about the divides in the US public, please leave your comments below.
Poor Richard
Related Stuff:
Listen to the story Bill Moyers tells about an Old Cherokee Chief and his “two wolves” at 6:20 into this video:
Church of Reality
Critiques Of Libertarianism
Evolving Thoughts
P2P Foundation
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
The Stone
July 16, 2010 at 11:01 am
Very Bakuninist of you to draw a dichotomy between authority and equality, instead of the usual authority vs. liberty or equality vs. efficiency. I applaud.
July 16, 2010 at 9:36 pm
Lori,
thanks for your comment. I’m glad you found something practical about my writing.
I’m sure Bakunin is an interesting historical figure but I don’t think I am an anarchist in any sense. I strongly support the rule of law and the social contract as the necessary context for peace and justice.
As a pragmatist rather than an ideologue or technocrat, I think the greatest social utility comes from balance and compromise amidst a diversity of competing interests and values. What makes balance and compromise possible is full information transparency and accountability.
The greatest problems humanity faces are information asymmetry and our own irrationality.
PR
July 24, 2010 at 12:48 pm
I think the list is on the mark from the perspective of a progressive, but I doubt that anyone would agree with more than a few of the terms on the Authoritarian side. There is a huge social desirability bias in the list. I wonder whether there is a way to make both sides of the list more palatable to their respective advocates.
I don’t think that there will ever be an actual war between the 2 sides, as a peaceful egalitarian. From a practical perspective, too many families have members on both sides of the spectrum to allow for a war, and that’s a good thing. Also, as a trained psychological statistician, when we examine any trait, it turns out to be a continuum, most likely in the form of a normal curve with the peak in the middle, meaning that most people are probably somewhat near the middle of the spectrum, although the Authoritarian/Egalitarian distinction does seem particularly polarized these days. Perhaps the people on either extreme are the most vocal, creating that impression.
By the way, there is no date on this post. Is that intentional? Can I use the list? I find it very useful.
July 25, 2010 at 4:13 pm
I agree about the obvious social desirability bias. The lists might be more fun if the bias was softened and there was some chance that someone might self-identify with the “authoritarian” side. I’ll look at that in the future.
I say somewhere in the piece that the axis (and/or each pair of values) can be seen as a continuum that exists in each of us, but I think that many of us also show a net bias one way or the other.
Feel free to quote anything you like with attribution.
Thanks for commenting!
PR
July 29, 2010 at 3:39 pm
Poor Richard, the reason I focused on the social desirability bias is that I was wondering about finding a way to show that both progressives and conservatives are biased toward positively framing their own perspectives. It could be done as an actual study, maybe on Facebook. However, I do think the progressive frame is more realistic. Overall, I love your idea and the list.
February 8, 2012 at 10:48 pm
Let us not forget that Reagan’s future vp (Bush) and cia chief (Casey) met with the Ayatolla Khomeini behind the back of the then-current Carter administration (treason) and arranged for Iran to keep the American hostages until after the election. In return Iran got, at the very least, a conduit thru which to illegally receive missiles and other armaments–which came to light when traitor Ollie North got busted taking the missile $$$ and giving it to friends in Central America who turned out, naturally enough, to be drug smugglers USA-bound. Ah, the good old days…
February 29, 2012 at 4:21 pm
Basket Puma, thanks for the comment. When Eisenhower warned against the military-industrial complex, the capture of government by private interests was already pretty far advanced. Is there any way back to government in good faith and in the public interest? I doubt it. It is often said that liberal democracy can only exist in conditions of economic plenty. Meanwhile a growing population competes for shares of a shrinking pie of natural resources.
The Occupy movement may be the best targeted reform effort, but only time will tell if it is sustainable.
PR
February 29, 2012 at 6:05 pm
A shrinking population means a period with a top-heavy age distribution. We’ve been backed into a corner. Some are questioning whether social democracy is dead, forever.
February 29, 2012 at 8:30 pm
n8chz: Yeah, “The Death of Social Democracy” may be similar to Chris Hedges’ ‘Death of the Liberal Class’. Another period of “dark ages” would not surprise me. But interestingly, a recently aired episode of “Pirate TV” (freespeech.org) claims that the ruling class likes “dystopian future” scenarios as part of a general fear-mongering approach. Regardless, I’m inclined to think that future conditions will psychologically favor authoritarian arrangements over egalitarian, cooperative ones–even though the latter may offer greater real utility. Humanity seems driven largely by emotion. News of our “enlightenment” has been greatly exaggerated.
PR