Libertarians vs Communitarians?…Is This Really the Primary Split?

by

@TedThorson4506 says:

The current American Left (communitarian) and the current American Right (libertarian) are diametrically opposed politically, and thus have no common ground. No reconciliation is possible.

…which inspired @michelletandler to post a poll: is reconciliation possible?  As of this writing, the voting stands at:

–Yes, 29%
–No, 42%
–Maybe, 25%
–Other, 3%

I voted ‘other’, because I’m not sure that ‘libertarians vs communitarians’ really represents the primary factor in the split we are seeing. As I said at Michelle’s post:

I don’t think the current American Left is really communitarian. They use the term ‘communities’ a lot, but their idea of a ‘community’ is basically a demographically-defined group, or a category of people defined by sexual behavior.

What do you think…does ‘libertarians vs communitarians’ really capture the primary factor in the split we are seeing?  And, if not, what factor(s) are primary in this split? And, whatever those factors may be, is there a real chance for reconciliation?

 

8 thoughts on “Libertarians vs Communitarians?…Is This Really the Primary Split?”

  1. Oh boy…

    I have a very hard time assigning specific ideologies along a neatly defined Right-Left split. There might be more Libertarians among the Right than Left but would you really call Trump a Libertarian?

    Second answer first and that is of course there is a chance at “reconciliation” whatever that means

    If I had to describe the divide in the US it would be between progressives/rationalists and what I will call naturalists

    The progressive gestalt is based on the idea that there is such a thing as capital-H History and that it marches ever forward, decipherable, and the human world can not only be shaped but perfected by human reason. While we think of a green-haired 47-gender people as nuts, they are in fact for a lack of a better term rationalists and they are connected to the progressives because they believe that nature can be subjugated and altered by human reason

    The naturalists are those who believe that the metaphysical universe exists outside of human reason and that it is the job of human society not to alter (which is beyond our capacity) but rather to understand it.

    The American regime as it has existed since 1776 is a naturalist conception. It is based on that which exists beyond our sense experience and independent of us – natural rights, the tendency of society toward tyranny and decay.

    On one side of the divide you have those who believe human society can be built on reason and imagination – essentially the role of God – while on the other side society can only be built on understanding the true nature of Man.

    I think that sums up the past 150 years quite well

    To the blurb in Thorson’s X profile – “Only a national divorce will save limited government” that just illogical nonsense

    The progressive/rationalist mindset is part of a larger historical wave roiling across the West stemming from modernity – if you notice Europe has many of the same problems. The idea that a national divorce or whatever will protect you from it is dangerous because without actually defeating its root causes will only lead to tyranny in red America… a national divorce would simply be the last desperate, futile act. And if you can defeat its root causes, then you don’t need to divorce.

  2. How about the dichotomy between people who are on the take and the people who are paying?

    Much of today’s left-wing politics consists of attempts to justify claims by leftist constituent groups on the resources of non-leftists.

  3. Neptunus Lex cited his favorite professor at the Naval Academy:

    “The innate character flaw of the political right, with its thrumming appeals to the logic of blood and soil, is its lamentable tendency to go in search of enemies abroad. The left, on the other hand, with its own appeals to the politics of envy and class warfare, is content to find mortal enemies closer to hand.”

    The ‘tendency to go in search of enemies abroad’ is certainly not the case with today’s Right, although it applied much more when Lex wrote the above (2008). Today’s Left, on the other hand, is definitely all about finding mortal enemies closer to hand.

  4. There really isn’t anything like a unified “right” these days. Everyone who isn’t a leftist gets lumped in together, but these “right” elements have nothing to do with each other, and very few of them are even remotely libertarian.

  5. I think ‘libertarians vs communitarians’ is a valid idea. Alternatively, the split is between Traditionalists (GOP) and Radicals (Dem).

    Finally, Democrats include those who feed at the public trough, and those who are simply ignorant and/or stupid.

    I think reconciliation is possible, but would be a long and hard process; I’m talking years.

  7. “…Democrats include…those who are simply ignorant and/or stupid.”
    Plus the mentally disturbed.

  8. A few thoughts…

    1–my Political Science professor distinguished between Authoritarianism and Totalitarianism as follows: the Authoritarian regime demands full control of the government by the ruling group, outsiders must now interfere…but outside the realm of politics, they leave you pretty much alone, The Totalitarian regime, OTOH, wants to control all aspects of society and to reengineer them as they see fit, By this definition, the Democrats are clearly Authoritarian, but they go beyond that, pretty far into outright Totalitarianism.

    2–it’s been suggested that the primary split in American politics in between People of Envy and People of Agency:

    https://intrastellar.substack.com/p/the-politics-of-agency-or-envy

    …clearly, the Democrats are more aligned with the Envy pole. That’s not to say that there are not highly-successful high-agency people who identify as Democrats, but to a considerable extent the party is comprised of those who are either personally motivated by envy, or want to gain power by taking advantage of those who are so motivated.

    3–Republicans are more supportive of the concept of the Nation-State; today’s Democrats tend to identify with racial/tribal groupings on the one hand, and ‘the world’ on the other.

    4—today’s Democrats believe in suitability for key jobs..especially key political leadership jobs..being defined by educational credentials.

Leave a Comment