OJBs Web Site: Blog Page

Note: You are currently viewing my old web site. There is a new version with most of this content at OJB.NZ.
The new site is being updated, uses modern techniques, has higher quality media, and has a mobile-friendly version.
This old site will stay on-line for a while, but maybe not indefinitely. Please update your bookmarks. Thanks.

Add a Comment (Go Up to OJB's Blog Page)

My New Party

Entry 1815, on 2016-10-09 at 11:12:00 (Rating 4, Politics)

I have noticed recently that many of my interactions on the internet have become more confrontational and argumentative. That might be because I frequent places where robust debates are likely, or maybe it's just that I am a cantankerous old fart!

But seriously, the problem is that I seem into get equal amounts of trouble in discussions (or debates or arguments) with liberal left people as I do with libertarians or conservatives. Of course, it goes without saying that I get into vigorous debates when visiting climate change denial, anti-vaccination, pro-gun, and creationist web sites, but there should be no surprises there.

I personally think my refusal to accept the norm is a good thing because it means that I am not too devoted to a particular dogma and that I think for myself. As Mark Twain said "whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform."

So let's look at what I think are the good and bad points of the different political ideologies I get into debates over...

I have the greatest attachment to liberalism and the politics of the left and, if I do a political evaluation, this is the area I am usually assigned to. But there are some bad aspects of it which I strongly object to. Mainly that would be political correctness and naive acceptance of naturalistic claims.

So when I see things like "we can learn a lot from Maori, they have a special connection with nature" I call BS on that. It might be true, but there is no real reason to think that it is, and I could produce some points which would contradict the idea. The main reason people believe it is pure political correctness and very few can defend the idea beyond repeating meaningless catch-phrases.

And when I see "we need to abandon modern chemical farming and especially genetic engineering because the natural, organic approach is much safer and better for society" I call BS again. And like the previous point, it could be true, but there is no consistent evidence to suggest that it is, and I could produce a lot of information which is contrary to the idea.

So what about libertarianism? Well I have a sort of love/hate relationship with it, because it does have maximum freedom and minimum interference with individuality at is core (which I like), but it also strongly supports privatisation and pure capitalism which I overall disagree with.

So I would generally support the libertarian social agenda of maximum freedom but I think there is strong evidence that rampant private enterprise can never be good for society and that it inevitably ends up taking away any advantages the social agenda might provide.

And so on to conservatism. Actually, I think there is some merit in its purported philosophy of looking at how things have been done in the past and not going ahead with change unless there is ample evidence that it is going to produce a better outcome, but that's not where it usually ends.

Because many conservatives take things far beyond that and oppose change even when there is no real reason to think it will be problematic and fairly good evidence to say it would result in a more free and progressive society. On the positive side, conservatives tend to be extremely critical of political correctness and I definitely approve of that!

None of the major political philosophies suit me so, as many people have suggested (as a joke), maybe I should start my own party with my own special philosophy. It would be called the "Rationalist Party" and it would reject all of the weaknesses of the existing political camps.

We would have none of the political correct nonsense the liberals refuse to question, none of the dogmatic attachment to privatisation and free markets the libertarians treat as almost a religion, and none of the failure to move forward with new ideas the conservatives suffer from.

It would be the perfect political system, but rational people never or rarely want to get involved in politics, so I guess it will never happen.

Comment 1 (4548) by Anonymous on 2016-10-20 at 20:32:38:

I agree. I don't like the parties we have now either. When do we start our new party? :)

Comment 2 (4550) by OJB on 2016-10-21 at 12:04:22:

Well as I have said on many occasions: anyone who thinks they belong in politics probably shouldn't be there. The more thoughtful, less falsely confident, individuals who would make much better leaders are the ones who don't want to be. The same applies to all areas where people gain excessive power. In general (there are exceptions) people who want to be judges, police, business leaders, or politicians probably should be the last selected for those positions.

So what I'm saying is that people like me never start political parties because we aren't deluded enough, we aren't narcissists, and we don't have false impressions of our own infallibility!

You can leave comments about this entry using this form.

To add a comment: enter a name and email (both optional), type the number shown above, enter a comment, then click Add.
Note that you can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous.
Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies and updates to this entry.
The comment should appear immediately because the authorisation system is currently inactive.