Liberalism and the "Natural Moral Order"

This is a perfect opportunity for me to address the key difference between liberalism and conservatism. You see, Democrats have been wondering for the past few months why Republicans have been so successful at winning office. The answer the Demcrats have come up with is this: The Republicans lie to people through a message machine - which includes politicians, talk radio, Fox News, Conservative Publications, and Conservative think tanks - and uneducated people are not intelligent enough to distinguish between lies and truth. Thus, when the message machine keeps repeating a message, less intelligent, uneducated people will believe it, no matter how false it is. The solution: create an alternative message machine that tells the truth. Liberals already use the universities to perceive and tell the truth, now liberals must use the tools that the conservatives have been using: talk radio, think tanks, magazines, and cable shows.

The Conservatives, such as David Brooks, argue that there is no conservative message machine because conservatives often disagree with each other. The are traditional conservatives, who think in terms of morality, and there are libertarians, who just want government off their backs. Other conservatives argue that it is not necessary for conservatives to agree with each other, as long as they find a conservative philosophy that they agree with. Brooks tells us that the one think uniting conservatives is a belief in a natural moral order. "When modern conservatism became aware of itself, conservatives were so far out of power it wasn't even worth thinking about policy prescriptions. They argued about the order of the universe, and how the social order should reflect the moral order. Different factions looked back to different philosophers - Burke, Aquinas, Hayek, Hamilton, Jefferson - to define what a just society should look like. Conservatives fell into the habit of being acutely conscious of their intellectual forebears and had big debates about public philosophy. That turned out to be important: nobody joins a movement because of admiration for its entitlement reform plan. People join up because they think that movement's views about human nature and society are true."

This is the difference between liberalism and conservatism. Brooks attempts to articulate this difference. " Liberals have not had a comparable public philosophy debate. Liberals are less conscious of public philosophy because modern liberalism was formed in government, not away from it. In addition, liberal theorists are more influenced by post-modernism, multiculturalism, relativism, value pluralism and all the other influences that dissuade one from relying heavily on dead white guys. " This statement goes in the right direction, but it is time to say what really divides liberals from conservatives.

Conservatives believe in a "natural moral order": an order in the universe and in nature that is intelligent and makes everything possible. They argue that a society, in terms of economic relations, social relations, political relations, and religious beliefs, should follow this order if it wishes to preserve itself.

In contrast, Liberals do not believe in a "natural moral order". Instead, liberals perceive artificial order that has no necessary logic to it. This is the lesson that liberals derive from post-modernism, multiculturalism, relativism, and value pluralism. All of these philosophies and perspectives attack the idea of order in anything, whether that order exists in society or nature. Liberals also turn to Quantum Physics as a way to explain why there is no natural order: on the large scale there may be the appearance of order, but on the small scale there is only chaos. We can assess probabilities, but we cannot predict anything, and there are so many alternative outcomes for every action.

Thus, while conservatives believe that ideas have consequences, A -> B, liberals believe that ideas have many possible consequences, and that actions have many possible consequences, A-> B, A-> C, A->D, etc.

These intellectual differences can be summed up into different phases. Conservatives believe that there is a natural order that is not created by humans. They call this order "God". A conservative would say, "God is independent from us, has created this natural order, and we must follow that order if we wish to live happy, fulfilling lives." Liberals believe that any order that exists in the world, or in nature, is create by humans, with a little help from nature. A liberal would say, "We are God (or gods), and we can create order in whatever manner we wish, and we can define happiness in whatever manner we wish. All that we require is for each god to allow space for all other gods to pursue happiness according to their own definition (be tolerant and respectful of differences)."

There is no way for the conservative philosophy to be reconciled with the liberal philosophy because of these different statements. A conservative is fundamentally passive: a conservative simply responds to the natural order of the universe and tries to preserve that order. A liberal is fundamentally active: a liberal wants to know how to create order through knowledge, political movement, economic policy, social relations, artistic movements, religion, etc., and a liberal does exactly that. Thus, conservatives call liberal government "activist" government. Conservatives call liberal judges "activist" judges.

Now, conservatives can be just as active as liberals, but only when they perceive liberals as destroying the "natural moral order" through activity in politics, art, religion, etc. Conservatives want liberals to be just as passive and accepting of the "natural moral order" as the conservatives are.

This debate has been occurring ever since the Judeo-Christian religions were set up. Judaism and Christianity both argue that there is a natural order, created by an all-powerful, all-knowing, and very separate God. Conservatives - even if they are athiests - accept this fundamental argument. They may replace God with the Free Market (libertarians), with the State (fascists), or with the Individual (libertarians), but they all base their philosophies on the idea that a natural order will be the result. Jews and Christians tell liberals that there is only one God, that humans are not gods, and that the only being who thinks he is god is the Devil, or Satan. Libertarians tell liberals that there is only the market, or the rational individual, and that any attempt to create order apart from the natural economic order will result in the destruction of freedom. Fascists tell liberals that the state is the source of all natural order, and that without the state there will be no natural order, thus causing suffering.

Hence, every conservative you talk to will proclaim that some type of natural order exists, and that this is the ONLY type of order that can exist. Any attempts to create a different type of order will be fruitless and wasteful. Any liberal you talk to will argue that there is no such thing as a natural order, and that if you think there is a natural order you are limiting your own freedon to create your own type of order.

There are popular phrases and actions that derive from these distinct perceptions. In liberal circles, we talk about "close-minded" individuals who are traditional and conservative, and "open-minded" individuals who are liberal, or even radical. To have a close mind is to have a mind that is closed to the possibility of any order that is different from the one you are accustomed to. To have an open mind is to actively seek out and contemplate different types of order that you can create, either through social relationship, art, economic behavior, religious activity, etc. Moreover, liberals talk "mind-blowing", "mind-altering" drugs, such as marijuana and LSD, because they think that these drugs provide a mechanism for perceiving different types of order.

In conservative cirlces, we talk about the importance of family, prayer, or church, because we perceive each other these elements of life as providing some basis of natural order for us to follow. We also talk about the importance of having a hierarchy, or following authority, because even if the authority makes the wrong decision, the important principle is to have an order that guides our activity and thought.

Finally, this shows the difference between liberal and conservative politicians. Liberal politicians perceive order in the government, or in social movements. Consequently, you get two kinds of Democrats: Social Activists and Policy Wonks. Social activists work with policy wonks to create different types of economic and social arragements. Conservative politicians perceive order in nature. Consequently, you get two kinds of Republicans: Traditional Republicans who proclaim the natural moral order that God has created, and who try to get government to follow this natural moral order; Libertarian Republicans who proclaim that the free market is the source of all natural order, and simply want to prevent Social Activist Democrats and Policy Wonk Democrats from imposing a false order on the natural order.

Liberals have already had the public discussions about the nature of the universe, and they have decided that there is no nature inherent in the universe. Instead, they all agree that we create the universe without thoughts, actions, and emotions. Political and economic relations are simply an extention of that personal activity. Indeed, liberals thinks that, if the government provides complete order in all economic relationships, then people will be free to pursue their preferred social relationships, creating different types of order. The purpose of government is not to preserve natural order of any kind. Instead, the purpose is to provide economic security so that human beings do not have to sacrifice their ability to create different types of social order in order to follow some person's idea of an economic order.

Or, to put it more precisely, liberals believe that economic order is not natural, but imposed by the people who own the property, and that the concept of property is what allows for this artificial economic order to exist. Instead, liberals believe that there is no such things a property because everything is based on love and freedom. What they want the government to do is prevent money-hungry and power-hungry people from using their resources to restrict the freedom that all individuals have to create their own order.