Saturday, August 13, 2011

Ideology Contrast .....Left Wing /Right Wing "Authoritarianism" or "Motivation Theory"

I recently caught a title of an article that addresses this very question. I could only skim read, because in length and scope, it was ad nauseum.....so I was inspired to start a juicy topic here.

The author's conclusion was clearly stated....Leftist politics is absolutely Authoritarian, and Rightist politics, therefore is positionally neutered from being able to impose restrictive freedom upon society. Really?

My first problem, with this statement ...is that it reeks of a false dichotomy....which I have experienced to be, a far more popular notion on the right than on the left; intellectually speaking. It actually took me less than five seconds to intuitively assess that...authoritarianism... is really not the heart of the matter at all. Authority is basically a tool to lead informed, wise, thoughtful, and generous people towards peaceful societal co-existence. Sounds like part of a recipe for an ideal democratic republic...does it not?

My goal here is to shed more light on the MOTIVATION behind using the two-sided "sword of authority". It's my contention, that generally, this MOTIVATION behind any authority can be fairly clearly analyzed...whether it be self-serving, few-serving directed, on the right; or others-serving, many-serving oriented, on the left. We need to take a closer look at the function of properly tempered governmental authority here.

My concept here can clearly be stated that:

A) Generally the right wing is driven by individualist-serving, powerful-few serving legislation; both in corporate, business and in moral criminal law. The right wing prefers legislation to be dogmatic, and "set in stone" (easy for narrow minds to understand) and closed to further change or discussion by any, except for the few; wealthy and powerful elite.

Therefore, mostly, right wing ideology is proportionately more popular with teenagers and those in the twilight years of life...who have closed their ears to new thoughts.....they do NOT want anybody to tell them what to do!...and when do teenagers listen?....they want to learn the ropes by themselves....they just don't trust those boring, "authoritarian warnings" that may save their lives.

Let's look at the familiar misguided complaining behind compulsory seat belt and helmet laws. It's almost a foregone conclusion that the MOTIVATION behind the law is overarching altruism and thoughtfulness both to individual safety prevention and to keep insurance rates lower for all the sane people, who end up subsidizing the costs of the insane rebels who get maimed or needlessly die with their "freedom" to be reckless taken with them.

A few weeks ago, a telling story made the press, about someone who tragically died in a crash because of not wearing a helmet. Ironically, the event happened during an.....anti-compulsory helmet law demonstration....what a price to pay for "freedom"...don't you think?

B) Generally the left wing is motivated by a many-serving, other-serving world view; which has the intention of legislating regulation to limit the individual entity's abuse of entitlement. On the left, we understand the built-in problems of human greed, stupidity, thoughtlessness and low information or ignorance...need to be rooted out by the careful use, not the abuse of authority. It is intuitively assessed also, that these above negative, undesirable traits do not bode well within a peace loving, idyllic democratic republic.

Therefore we prefer a constitution and laws that are amendable, evolving, progressing; as it were; and open to societal imput from all walks of life. We believe that it is not possible or practical to legislate the morals of "victimless" scenarios.

Foolishly, the ideology of the right wing, puts the onus of law and order on the individual's own personal moral restraints...and we all know how that works out...hello?... Detroit. Because, we don't really need too many laws or regulation, now do we? People will just magically love each other, and "do the right thing"...and, of course, we can always count on the mystical "market" genie to just work everything out!!! Piece Of Cake!

Therefore, generally, there are proportionately more liberals in the 25-65 year age range....we appreciate the "nanny state" for good reasons. Our "Nanny" has our best interests in mind and always reads "moral stories" to us before tucking us in. We families want our "Nanny" to
protect us from those bad "boogie men" with ruthless intentions that steal our quality of life; balancing the individual's civil rights with the practical expectations of a community that values the common peace...if we let them!

Two other important concepts to also consider in assessing the two-sided "sword of authority" is ascertained by looking at a root word "author" which really points toward "motivation"; and whereas a sword can be used to "kill"; it may also be used to "defend". One has to meditate a bit on that! Also, the ironic tyrannical, chaotic "authority" of anarchy and lawlessness which historically, provenly leads an every-man-for-himself-society fairly quickly to corruption and its eventual total collapse.

Does one think that the drift toward anarchy is a chance for real "freedom" from "Nanny"? Does one think that real peace could actually exist if there is no universal, societal sense of boundaries drawn to seriously impede or stop one's malevolent intentions from prospering and therefore ultimately thoroughly corrupting society? How could this ideology, ultimately, not lead to a chaotic society of vandals, vigilantes, and overall societal discord and paranoia.....hello?...Somalia.

No wonder that some studies' statistics have shown a significantly higher proportional number of suicides under conservative rule, than under liberal rule....hmmmm....

Lastly, what of the hypocritical stance from the right wing that wants government laws not to apply to business, yet; with the same passion; legislate; at great financial and bureaucratic cost and waste; morality that can only potentially self-inflict harm? Drug abuse and prostitution, are just two of many in this category. hmmmmm?

Please, I would also wish to experience someone try to defend the perverted use of "Nanny" by the right. The concept of a caretaker is traditionally thought of as a cheerful and loving person; but recently has been twisted by the "right" to mean an overbearing monstrous drill sergeant on steroids. Maybe all these ideologues with "daddy issues" need some therapy? What do you think?

1 comment:

Rebecca Thrower said...

The only time "Nanny Government" catches a break is when she comes to the aid of RIGHT WINGERS after a Natural Disaster. They are often the first people crying out for Federal dollars. Rebuild, assist and rehabilitate their torn communities. In America, it seems Money is the bandaid that makes the boo-boo all better.

Hypocrites. All.