By Charles Novitsky
Inside The Mind Of The Well Intentioned Liberal
The problem progressives face, is that "Humanity 2.0", doesn’t exist in nature or reality, and that trying to impose some dreamy new set of ideologies and rules for human behavior and social conduct, risks destroying our currently imperfect, but working "Humanity Version 1". Nearly all other previous societies that tried to impose a “New Order by Reasoning”, ended destroying themselves through the use of force and bureaucracy. Examples are: Prussian Germany, Leninist Russia, Maoist China, and ancient Rome. They accidentally destroyed what makes Humanity version 1.0 function—natures perfected rules of social conduct, motivation, and productivity.
According to Friedrich Hayek, Von Misses, and other economic sociologists, our human society is NOT the product of intentional reasoning, or intentional design. Mankind's traits were shaped over time, by the slow process of evolution. But unlike our hands and feet, it is not a physical evolution, but the social evolution of our behaviors, mannerisms, and inner thought processes*. This behavioral evolution makes the cohabitation of 7 billion people on our crowded globe, possible. This eons old evolutionary processes, far beyond our control or comprehension, shaped, and allowed mankind to cooperate enough to survive, and raise families. These evolutionary mannerisms are the basis for trust, revenge, justice, and all of our social interactions. They even form the basis, and are observable in something as common, as how a man and woman may have sex without rape. How do these two, or more people, control their boundaries, rules, and behaviors on a date. It likewise forms the basis to decide, if your neighbor is trustworthy or not, and what to do about it.
We could go on ad infinitum, but the point is, our miracle society is only possible, through these evolved invisible rules, more commonly known as the “extended order”* of mankind's cooperation. By contrast, put two random chimpanzees, who do not know each other, into the same room, and there is violent chaos. According to animal behaviorists, two unfamiliar chimpanzees in the same room, will quickly devolve into a violent fight. There is no polite conversation, or exchange of ideas possible. Mankind may have arguably started off like the chimpanzees, but eons ago, the majority of those peoples, or tribes, whose actions failed to allow the development of the extended cooperation needed for a large society, died out. In other words they failed to benefit from the extra food and resources possible in a cooperative society. They failed to survive, and thus failed to create children and offspring. This is how evolutionary processes work, they shape those traits, physical or behavioral, that allow the best survival and outcome, by erasing out the least beneficial of the infinite possibilities. This is why Man, (and Woman), is exactly who we are, why we are, and what we are—a truly marvelous socially cooperating animal. If you need any proof, witness how I am now writing this marvelous article for you—and just as marvelous, you are cooperatively reading my thoughts on paper, or screen. Thanks ;-)
Back to the word, and ideology of liberalism, which ironically in the 1800's meant the opposite of what it does today. Back then, when our founding fathers were called liberalists, it was closer in meaning, to what some might today, use the word “conservative”, or perhaps “libertarian”—then, it meant less government, more freedom, and praise of personal responsibility. Modern Liberals, like to believe that mankind has evolved so high, that we can simply use our minds, and reason to reshape society. After all, reason is quite useful to achieve, or plan for a great many of our needs, such as getting a good job, or a college degree. We certainly need to employ reason even for basic things, such as protecting and raising a family. Reason is an essential human tool. But reason is not infallible, for it can be shaped by mankind's weakness to use imperfect logic. But, what utopian wishers (i.e progressive liberals) fail to understand, is, that misusing reason to control and shape society is both dangerous, and a fools errand. Our complex society is beyond directed control and wishful shaping. Yes, we can indeed make laws and regulations, and this may control some bad behaviors with the threat of prison, but it does not cure our social ills. For example, while we do give welfare to our poorer section of society, sadly, counter to our intuition and desired results, we see it doesn't cure poverty, nor crime. Disappointingly, some sociologists assert, our welfare funding simply entraps these least successful people, onto a conveyor belt of failure*. The unintended result, is that those who least likely have the will, skills, or mental focus, to get out of welfare, are thus trapped in it, to become addicted to it, perhaps for the rest of their lives. Some further argue, that the next generation of children in a failed welfare family, learn the misproductive habits of their welfare parents, to perpetuate a multigenerational malady of failure in American society. Perhaps this is why, even though our modern welfare society has tampered with social values since the 1960's, it has failed to achieve the promised cure for poverty, and social disenfranchisement. Perhaps even worse, it appears to concentrate over periods of time, people with the same lack of fortune. The concept, and solution of public housing, and public schooling, essentially become storage houses, to create entire communities of failure—villages of the damned.
This is the predicted outcome to “well intentioned” interference, with complex mechanisms. A horrible example of which is Australia’s poisonous cane toad infestation*. This cat sized toad was introduced, to help solve the sugar cane problem, of beetles eating the crops, in the 1930's. The lesson, as many ecologists will tell you, is that it’s dangerous to tamper with something you don't fully understand. Precisely because it is too complex, with thousands of counter consequences, nature has that nasty habit of biting us back—when we meddle with it, or try to plan it, or reason with it. The dangerous outcome, usually is a bit similar to what happens, when you call the beloved “Three Stooges”, to solve a problem. Well intentioned, and motivated the Stooges may be, but their lack of understanding, ends up causing unintended catastrophe.
Welfare, just like any other recipe, can create something good, or something bad--depending on what ingredients are used, and how exactly baked. Evolutionary behaviorists studies of ancient societies show us, that kindness and rescue for our fellow villager or neighbor did take place, but only between known peoples and villages. It was never arbitrary, nor unlimited. Furthermore there was a personal satisfaction reward from the act of giving and helping. There was perhaps a level of guilt arising inside these recipients to succeed and better themselves without handouts. In these original societies, the rules of extended cooperation were unconsciously followed, and obeyed. This kind of voluntary, and supervised assistance, can be called the good type of welfare. Utopianists, by contrast, do not follow this exact recipe, they have devised a conscious "reasoning" recipe, that unfortunately violates many of our hidden social evolutionary rules. It would be futile to even try to classify them, or know them all--they are hidden in our psyche, and DNA. So, this article does not advocate a welfare-less, or uncompassionate society. It only claims government politicians, and pro-government intervention liberals, do not have the proper recipe, and thus cause more damage than they solve. Both Republican, and Democratic progressives, naively try to imitate a good social process, with the artificial act of "forcing compassion", and "forcing charity". A better tactic would be for all collectivists to try to bring awareness of a cause, and convince their friends and neighbors for voluntary donations, and support. A society where charity is voluntary would be a far wiser, and far more effective in too many ways for social scientists to yet understand. A smart example of using voluntary community based awareness for charity, were the 1980s concerts for Bangladesh, Haiti, and others*.
So in conclusion, Liberals, sometimes also called Utopianists, Progressives, Collectivists, Socialists, or Communists, don't understand the foundation of our hidden evolved rules, underpinning the success this extended order of mankind—the reason why we are all here today, and not in our original tropical jungle. “Reason”, tricks them with the audacity to believe they know better than God, or natures, nearly perfect behavioral evolutionary process. Thus they naively believe solving poverty, is as simple as taking money from our employers, and hard working taxpayers, and giving it away to the poor, e.g: those with a lack of fortune. After all, it does sound reasonable. But many of them, sorely lacking any economic understanding, or economic training, fail to see exactly how, that has caused a “cane toad sized” side effect—the loss of jobs in America. And without enough “well paying” jobs, we lose prosperity, and everything else, including our food, and civility.
