Isn’t it true you can’t have it both ways, you either have universal rights and liberal principles are a thing or they are not. — schopenhauer1
The West has also given us fascism, socialism, communism, and whatever the current brand of nanny-statism is. — NOS4A2
Do you mean the west should be antagonistic toward countries that don't value rights and liberal principles? — frank
Attempts by Europeans to impose "universal rights and liberal principles" by colonizing and coopting non-Europeans for the last half-millennium was and is, in fact, trying to "have it both ways" – subverting that "universalist" end with illiberal (i.e. imperialist/hegemonic) means.Isn’t it true you can’t have it both ways, you either have universal rights and liberal principles are a thing or they are not. — schopenhauer1
In theory, maybe; but not in practice. Empires (via conquistadors, gunships, missionaries & systematic colonization), for example, are not "self-critical" emancipatory projects (pace Hegel, vide Aristotle).The very idea of being self-critical of one’s OWN ideals seems a Western thing.
:fire:Journalist: What do you think of Western civilization?
Mahatma Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.
Of course. They also gave us the "nation-state". Indeed, I would argue it is how the ideas of "nation-state" collide with ideas of "liberalism" "conservatism" and "socialism" that cause many issues of the 19th-21st centuries.
Do you mean the west should be antagonistic toward countries that don't value rights and liberal principles? — frank
In theory, maybe; but not in practice. Empires (via conquistadors, gunships, missionaries & systematic colonization), for example, are not "self-critical" emancipatory projects (pace Hegel, vide Aristotle). — 180 Proof
Attempts by Europeans to impose "universal rights and liberal principles" by colonizing and coopting non-Europeans for the last half-millennium was and is, in fact, trying to "have it both ways" – subverting that "universalist" end with illiberal (i.e. imperialist/hegemonic) means. — 180 Proof
In theory, maybe; but not in practice. Empires (via conquistadors, gunships, missionaries & systematic colonization), for example, are not "self-critical" emancipatory projects (pace Hegel, vide Aristotle). — 180 Proof
I think you’re right about that. I would go further and say the nation-state is just a repurposing of the Ancien Régime, not a repudiation, and the ideas you mention are built around seeking that power.
Anyways, there is a good little book by Pascal Brukner called The Tyranny of Guilt: An Essay on Western Masochism that goes deep into your topic from the French perspective. It’s basically a form of narcissism arising from a wing of well-fed socialists upset that, in the end, the proletariat sided with their bogeyman. — NOS4A2
Is “Western Civilization”, the very foundation self-criticism regarding ideas like universal rights, due process, and Western philosophy itself unfairly and unthinkingly maligned by educators and leftists for some kind of relativism or one-way version of rights? — schopenhauer1
To give an example, if someone is against cultural exports then they are not rationally permitted to export their favorite issues to other cultures (e.g. exporting women's rights to the Middle East). If they are going to try to export their favorite issues to other cultures, then they cannot oppose cultural exports tout court and still be consistent. — Leontiskos
There is a knot of contradictory beliefs for those who hold "cultural relativism" leftist beliefs. — schopenhauer1
That's another thing that irks me about the left: out of one side of their mouth come claims that everything is merely a power game, and out of the other side come claims regarding justice. Granted, they may not use the word "justice," but that is what they are talking about: what is right or wrong (permissible or impermissible) in a manner that is not affected by will or power. — Leontiskos
I think you’re right about that. I would go further and say the nation-state is just a repurposing of the Ancien Régime, not a repudiation, and the ideas you mention are built around seeking that power. — NOS4A2
And did not the Scramble for Africa in the 1800s not create the arbitrary states (and notions of a nation-state) in Africa?The Sykes–Picot Agreement (/ˈsaɪks ˈpiːkoʊ, - pɪˈkoʊ, - piːˈkoʊ/[1]) was a 1916 secret treaty between the United Kingdom and France, with assent from the Russian Empire and the Kingdom of Italy, to define their mutually agreed spheres of influence and control in an eventual partition of the Ottoman Empire.
It depends on what the goals of those countries are. Are they expansionist? Are they threatening other Western countries and/or countries that are friendly to Western interests? Do they fund anti-West terrorists? The West should definitely be antagonistic towards China, Russia, Iran, and N. Korea. — RogueAI
Who are these leftists, and why is their devotion to one of four two-dimensional directions make them an enemy?Is “Western Civilization”, the very foundation self-criticism regarding ideas like universal rights, due process, and Western philosophy itself unfairly and unthinkingly maligned by educators and leftists for some kind of relativism or one-way version of rights?
Again, contradiction upon contradiction. — schopenhauer1
So which is it? It's either "law of the jungle and conquer", or universal rights exist. — schopenhauer1
Who are these leftists, and why is their devotion to one of four two-dimensional directions make them an enemy? — kudos
“What have the Romans ever done for us?” — I like sushi
I would go further and say it is part of Western culture, not just something that seems to be Western. Of course being critical about one's own culture and society isn't solely a Western thing. Kemalism of Turkey is a prime example of a non-Western nations leaders understanding that the weakness they suffered against the West was their own fault and because of their own backwardness. Similarly the Japanese woke up by an American warship and had their Meiji-restauration. Yet the kind of perpetual criticism is quite Western: everything could be always better.The very idea of being self-critical of one’s OWN ideals seems a Western thing. — schopenhauer1
I think you have cheated here. You have used the word ‘Leftist’ to contain an admixture of subject and predicates. It is no longer descriptive word, but has become the grounds for the tautology of ‘X are the problem, because they are people with this problem. All you have accomplished is put a name to a bunch of integrated predicates, which does not help describe who you’re talking about or what the problem is.These are people who have a strong commitment to collectivism and egalitarianism. In recent times, the left has taken on an adversarial disposition towards the liberal principles of freedom and progress.
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.