Can Society be too Liberal?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-03-2015, 07:49 PM (This post was last modified: 14-03-2015 09:31 PM by Αθεία Αμβρόσιος.)
Can Society be too Liberal?
I want to know your thoughts on liberal-oriented societies. Can you have a society that is too accepting? Can Freedom of Expression and Human Rights ever be a bad thing?

I will reserve my own opinion until I am satisfied there are enough answers to begin a debate. I have already got a position, and I am certain some of you will already smell the angle in which I will be arguing from.

Edit: Modern Liberal ideology (political correctness, etc) is the subject which is to be discussed.

Also, this is my first thread. So thanks in advance for any replies.

Το βάρος της απόδειξης βαρύνει αυτούς που κάνουν την αξίωση
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Αθεία Αμβρόσιος's post
14-03-2015, 08:22 PM
RE: Can Society be too Liberal?
Do you mean can a society flourish without bigots?

I'd say yes.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Minimalist's post
14-03-2015, 09:16 PM (This post was last modified: 14-03-2015 09:23 PM by Blackout.)
RE: Can Society be too Liberal?
To vague question. Define liberal, because liberalism can be classic or modern (which is associated with political correctness and excessive tolerance). Define acceptance and freedom of expression. Oh, and explain to me why human rights exist, I'm not expected to believe there are universal rights just because it's written in a piece of paper that happens to have no practical effect on most of the globe. In fact, the first article of the UDHR starts with the biggest bullshit ever

Quote:All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.


The more I think, the less I care about trivialities and value results the most. An egalitarian super liberal society is utopian by nature.

Human beings are always born different and therefore with different dignity, not to mention the spirit of brotherhood thing is actually a forced ideal that no one is obligated to accept; I don't need to act with a spirit of brotherhood towards others... You may be born with the same legal rights, but you never factually possess the same rights as a drastically different person.

Personally and forgetting the human rights rhetoric I see nothing wrong with tolerance as a value and free speech, but I think we shouldn't tolerate the intolerant.

Different people have different reasons to behave differently, not everyone holds the same values and we are all different. We can work towards an accepting society (if that's what you meant in the OP when you talked about liberalism) but it shouldn't be based on a political ideology (i.e. "Liberal") - Myself, I think that as long as tolerance is legally enforced and carried out in practice it's ok. I don't intend to force anyone to hold super liberal or tolerant ideas. I'm not tolerant of everything equally, I may be tolerant of gay people but I'm intolerant towards religious fundamentalism or some political ideologies. Marxists are intolerant towards the rich and capitalism. Egalitarians are intolerant against non-egalitarians. Conservatives hate liberals, liberals hate conservatives, libertarians hate liberals, fascists hate communists, etc. I defend a plural society ideologically wise and I don't intend to look for an unbearable utopia.

"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything" - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2015, 09:30 PM
RE: Can Society be too Liberal?
(14-03-2015 09:16 PM)Blackout Wrote:  To vague question. Define liberal, because liberalism can be classic or modern (which is associated with political correctness and excessive tolerance). Define acceptance and freedom of expression. Oh, and explain to me why human rights exist, I'm not expected to believe there are universal rights just because it's written in a piece of paper that happens to have no practical effect on most of the globe. In fact, the first article of the UDHR starts with the biggest bullshit ever

Quote:All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

I define liberal as modern liberal movement. I will update OP to clarify. Liberty in the classical sense is altogether more sensible (personally).

Το βάρος της απόδειξης βαρύνει αυτούς που κάνουν την αξίωση
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2015, 09:35 PM (This post was last modified: 14-03-2015 09:38 PM by yakherder.)
RE: Can Society be too Liberal?
A society which relies on a democratic process to make decisions in which a portion of that population wants stereotypically liberal things which can only be gained when a majority of the voters want those things but, in the name of being liberal, are accepting of people who are against those things, must also accept that their enlightened position has the potential to be self defeating.

Let's say, for example, that you want LGBT rights and the country is divided roughly 50/50 on the issue. You also want to be accepting, so you openly invite immigrants from countries where being gay is punishable by death. As a liberal hippie, your demographic group has an average of, say, 1 kid per couple and is thus in population decline without constant converts. As hardcore religious nutcases from agriculture based communities, the people you are inviting to your enlightened society have an average of 8 kids per couple, and as a free society you allow those people to raise their children as they see fit. A generation later, you're baffled to see that the percentage of homophobes within your society is on the rise.

This is, of course, a greatly oversimplified scenario. It is, nonetheless, just an example of how a society could theoretically be too accepting.

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes yakherder's post
14-03-2015, 09:36 PM
RE: Can Society be too Liberal?
Do you know what modern liberalism means? Because the amount of criticism people here on TTA direct towards religion is highly incompatible with the trends of modern liberals.

I don't know why modern liberalism is more desirable than other political ideology and I don't know why society needs to organize itself according to liberalism. It is a bad assumption. Why is it preferable that society is organized according to modern liberalism specifically? Because modern liberalism has given me nothing but anger - Entering the EU without referendums, contracting massive debt, laws passed limiting free speech, an almost bankrupted social security system, completely open borders without a choice, overwhelming amounts of political correctness and long lists of things people can't say (namely insulting religion and insulting people), etc. I sympathize with principles of classical liberalism, I just can't stand modern liberalism, as much as I can't stand religious conservatism.

"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything" - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2015, 09:40 PM (This post was last modified: 14-03-2015 09:46 PM by Blackout.)
RE: Can Society be too Liberal?
(14-03-2015 09:35 PM)yakherder Wrote:  A society which relies on a democratic process to make decisions in which a portion of that population wants stereotypically liberal things which can only be gained when a majority of the voters want those things but, in the name of being liberal, are accepting of people who are against those things, must also accept that their enlightened position has the potential to be self defeating.

Let's say, for example, that you want LGBT rights and the country is divided roughly 50/50 on the issue. You also want to be accepting, so you openly invite immigrants from countries where being gay is punishable by death. As a liberal hippie, your demographic group has an average of, say, 1 kid per couple and is thus in population decline without constant converts. As hardcore religious nutcase from agriculture based communities, the people you are inviting to your enlightened society have an average of 8 kids per couple, and as a free society you allow those people to raise their children as they see fit. A generation later, you're baffled to see that the percentage of homophobes within your society is on the rise.

This is, of course, a greatly oversimplified scenario. It is, nonetheless, just an example of how a society could theoretically be too accepting.
And hence why I started making a balance between authority and freedom. In the political compass I'm not too authoritarian and not too libertarian, perhaps slightly more authoritarian but I still value freedom greatly. Sometimes what needs to be done is limiting of freedom and it's not pretty to watch, but it has to be done. Using the example of immigrants you provided, it wouldn't be ethical or liberal to close borders or deport (with decency) some of them, but maybe it would be the right thing to do. This is actually an important question - Since modern Libs strive so much for tolerance and multiculturalism how can society coexist if we have so many different groups that hate each other? The way I see it, if modern liberals really want that, they should promote tolerance between every group. But is that possible?

Small edit - Ultimately what constitutes a liberal society is in itself a difficult to understand concept. Let's see - If I vote liberals I'll have more social tolerance but more taxes as well, but if I vote conservative I'll have less social freedom but more economic and free enterprise freedom. What if I prefer the later? (Conservatives in Europe are not so extreme as republicans in the US, some are pro gay marriage and abortion). If we took this to the extreme I could argue that not being able to kill others limits my freedom and is illiberal.

"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything" - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Blackout's post
14-03-2015, 10:24 PM
RE: Can Society be too Liberal?
(14-03-2015 07:49 PM)Αθεία Αμβρόσιος Wrote:  I want to know your thoughts on liberal-oriented societies. Can you have a society that is too accepting?
It's not government's place to dictate how we are to behave. We don't have to all be the same, we don't have to conform to norms.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-03-2015, 10:47 PM
RE: Can Society be too Liberal?
(14-03-2015 10:24 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(14-03-2015 07:49 PM)Αθεία Αμβρόσιος Wrote:  I want to know your thoughts on liberal-oriented societies. Can you have a society that is too accepting?
It's not government's place to dictate how we are to behave. We don't have to all be the same, we don't have to conform to norms.


It can be the government's place, depends on the government and the governed. Last time I checked most modern societies had laws against murder, as one of various means to prohibit behavior generally seen as destructive to society at large.


Please don't go full Libertarian on us. Luminon has been gone for a while, and I'd rather we didn't summon him back from the nether regions.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
14-03-2015, 11:29 PM
RE: Can Society be too Liberal?
You have to define liberal.

If you mean can we live *with* freedom of expression, *with* tolerance of minority groups (i.e. no racism/homophobia/sexism)... these things can't be imposed - but the law can enforce equal *treatment* regardless of people's individual opinions, at least theoretically.

I think ja, that's possible. And I don't think that's *too* liberal. I think that's the bare minimum before you can call yourself civilised.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: