Reducing it by reforming academia:
The liberalization of the American educational establishment has been a colossal failure. Liberals overtook the universities because (reasonably) they saw them as the way to shape a more progressive society in the long term. They insisted that they could set aside their own partisan beliefs and teach in ways that are fair to both sides. It is abundantly clear, however, that a progressive political mindset prevails in the American university system, especially at the elite levels. It’s more difficult for conservative professors to be hired or receive tenure, it’s more difficult for conservative students to speak up without fear of the consequences, and liberal students emerge from the universities with a terrifically superficial understanding of the conservative mindset — and American society is the poorer for it.
When you look at the three values that conservatives (according to Haidt) honor but liberals do not — loyalty, respect for authority, and sanctity — these are precisely the values that are flouted in the precincts of American academe. The result is a more impoverished moral imagination amongst students, a stubborn inability to understand the beliefs and the motives of conservatives, and thus the imputation of nefarious motives to those irrational conservatives who do not see things in the ways the illuminati do. If you don’t believe that this has contributed to the partisanship we’ve observed in recent years — particularly the exceedingly nasty way in which liberals in general have responded to the Tea Party movement, to social conservatives and generally to anyone who refers too much to moral sanctity and loyalty to American traditions and institutions, then I think you’re wearing exactly the kind of blinders Haidt talks about.
Haidt’s work is generating quite a stir.
Maybe I’m not a conservative, but I’m certainly no leftist!
Loyalty, sanctity and authority? What?
I’ve never really had any use for authority except as a means to an end to accomplish certain organizational tasks. It *is* strange watching other people reason about authority – it seems like it’s tied up into some sort of social dominance heirarchy with them, instead of “this guy is in charge within XXX scope to efficiently accomplish task YYY, sign on or not”. I’m not automatically resentful or rebellious against my employers, perhaps because I understand them being “in charge” (of their business, sure) doesn’t mean they own me/dominate my life. Nor am I eager to sign on with any Mussolini wannabes in government who think they can own me better or dominate my life for my own good.
As far as loyalty goes, the only group I have what could be called absolute loyalty to at present would be my family. My loyalty to any other group is derived from how effectively they allow me to meet my personal and familial goals/respect our rights.
And sanctity? I’m not quite sure what they mean by that. They would have to define their terms.
Perhaps that makes me “libertarian” instead of “conservative”. But until the left gets it through their arrogant thick heads that my life is **mine**, I will continue to vote to keep them as far away from power as possible.
Ams,
I think the Pournelle chart might clear up some of your confusion. Here is a link to it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pournelle_chart_color.gif
As you see, both Conservatism, along with Socialism and Communism are on the right. The Libertarians on the upper right. However many groups, like the Tea Party that focus on traditional beliefs ( return to the Constitution, etc.) usually end up on the lower right, which is where Conservatism is. Indeed, you could probably place all three leading Republican Candidates there just below President Obama who would be in the upper right if you mapped them based on their policy positions. (Ron Paul is however definitely in the upper left, which is why he is doing so poorly with the Republicans, especially the Tea Party…)
The values of Loyalty, Respect to Authority and Sanctity that Haig refers to are very much on the right side of the equation, while most academics I expect tend to be on the Lower Left side. And this is the disconnect between them and the Conservatives as well as the true Socialists and Communists, namely that most academics don’t value blind loyalty, have limited respect for both authority and sanctity. In short they seek to make folks think for themselves rather then follow someone blindly. And they advocate positions they feel will bring ‘social justice” without thinking them through (i.e. they are irrational in that aspect…)
Unfortunately most academics also buy into the “social justice” rhetoric of socialism and communism without looking beneath those nice sounding words and so are grouped with those on the Upper Right. But in reality they don’t belong there which is why the one thing Conservatives, Socialists and Communists all have in common when they take power is to purge the academics, from Hitler’s SS executing the school teachers in conquered villages to the Red Guards sending them to work on farm communes in the desert, things I expect the Republican conservatives dream about doing, at least base on their rhetoric 🙂
That chart shows the libertarians on the left, not the right, with the big-L libertarians on the upper left.
Aside from that, I thinkt the chart might be a bit dubious, as some of the groups are difficult to classify in such terms, and in some ways would be all over the map. Revolutionary roups that didn’t really have time to stabilize would include people drawn in because they were rebelling against the old authority, but also the leaders and members who were establishing a new authoritarian state. His placement of big-L libertarians (Ayn Rand, etc) in the upper left indicates that they are against authority, yet their philosophy requires that everyone strictly observe their rules of behavior, to the extent that their system can’t cope with the existence of thugs who like to knock people down and take their stuff, which is a highly irrational way to view human society. So you could just as well move them from the upper left to the lower right. Similarly, you could argue that many Nazis thought they were rebelling against religious mysticism and the oppressive manipulations of the rich and powerful Anglo-American and Jewish capitalists, moving them from the lower right to the upper left.
More thought is needed.
What we really need is a chart plotting political belief systems against dead bodies. I’m pretty certain which group would get the hockey stick.
Thomas,
if you want to see which ‘group’ normally talks about purges, pogroms or imprisonment based on that ‘groups’ sense of legality or group rights enforced by the group, go see who’s calling for the hunting down and lynching of George Zimmerman.
Here’s a hint, it’s NOT Conservative Republicans.
And just for the argument, the Conservative Republicans want everybody working in there sweat shops so the evil Conservative Republicans can make more money.