Liberalism versus illiberal ideologies

From: jimruttshow8596

The Jim Rutt Show, with guest James Lindsay, explores the fundamental differences between philosophical liberalism and contemporary illiberal ideologies, particularly those stemming from postmodernism and critical theory. The discussion highlights liberalism as a robust framework for societal progress and conflict resolution, while dissecting how postmodern thought has morphed into theories that actively undermine liberal principles.

The Liberal Alternative: A Method for Progress [07:17:00]

Philosophical liberalism stands in opposition to authoritarian movements of all types, whether left-wing, right-wing, secular, or theocratic [07:31:00]. It is presented as a superior method for both epistemology (the study of knowledge) and ethics [08:23:00]. The core argument is that liberalism, rather than being a specific political philosophy, functions as a system for resolving conflicts between individuals and societies [10:44:00].

Key aspects of liberalism include:

• Property Rights Once property rights are established, liberalism allows individuals to freely exchange and use their property, leading to market-based economic approaches like capitalism [10:50:00].
• Democracy In politics, liberalism supports democratic processes where citizens’ votes determine leaders, rather than relying on divine right or warlord dominance [11:16:16].
• Freedom of Expression Core principles of a liberal democracy include the right to petition the government, peaceful protest, and assembly, as enshrined in constitutional amendments [11:41:00].
• Reasoned Argument For resolving disagreements about ideas, liberalism advocates for seeking evidence and the most reasoned arguments, rather than being swayed by feelings or demands [12:09:00]. This means acknowledging that sometimes truth can be difficult or painful [12:25:00].
• Universal Humanity and Individual Autonomy Liberalism emphasizes the universal humanity of all individuals and their capacity for reason, moral decision-making, and autonomous thought [16:40:00]. This includes recognizing individual conscience, freedom from state-compelled beliefs (secularism), and the right to join groups voluntarily [16:55:00].

Liberalism has been historically instrumental in untying knots of injustice such as patriarchy, racism, slavery, and homophobia [17:19:00]. While often imperfect, it has a built-in mechanism for self-criticism and continuous improvement, allowing for gradual progress over time. Examples include the abolition of slavery in the US and Britain, and the Civil Rights movement, which appealed to foundational liberal promises of equality [19:08:00].

The Rise of Illiberalism: Postmodernism and its Applied Turn [24:19:00]

The focus of criticism is on a specific form of illiberalism, particularly the left-leaning “woke” or “social justice” movement [23:30:00]. This movement is seen as having abandoned liberal principles, driving a significant portion of current culture war tensions [24:25:00].

Postmodernism’s Core Concepts [25:42:00]

Originating in art and literature in the 1940s, postmodernism questioned rigid structures and rules, asserting that rules are often arbitrary [25:47:00]. In the 1950s and 60s, French philosophers like Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault adapted this, focusing on the interplay of language and power [26:51:00]. They sought to expose how cultural rules (or “regimes of truth” / “epistemes”) dictated thought and contained structural oppressions [27:50:00].

Postmodernism’s central idea is that all knowledge and claims to truth are ultimately the result of political processes, serving to advance power politics rather than objectively describe reality [29:17:00]. This perspective is described as nihilistic and despairing, particularly stemming from Marxists grappling with the failures of communism [31:55:00].

Two core principles define postmodern thought [41:06:00]:

1. Post-modern Knowledge Principle: Knowledge is socially constructed, generally in service of power, meaning there is no access to objective truth [41:11:00].
2. Post-modern Political Principle: Dominant groups construct knowledge to maintain power, necessitating an ethical imperative to dismantle powerful discourses [41:19:00].

Four core themes of postmodernism include [42:01:00]:

1. Blurring of Boundaries: Challenging categories like man/woman or knowledge/storytelling to make everything appear the same [42:09:00].
2. Almighty Power of Language: An exaggerated belief that words act like “magic spells” to structure society [42:24:00].
3. Cultural Relativism: Both ethical and epistemological, asserting that one culture’s morals or knowledge system cannot be judged by another’s (e.g., science cannot judge witchcraft) [42:35:00].
4. Dissolution of Universal Humanity and Individual Autonomy: Individuals are seen purely as products of their social groups or cultures, making genuine understanding between groups impossible [43:14:00].

Postmodernism’s “applied turn” in the 1990s saw radical activists (from the 60s and 70s) combine critical theory with postmodern tools [45:30:00]. They set aside universal deconstruction, claiming that “the experience of oppression is real” and only those with privilege could possibly deconstruct it [46:38:00]. This simplified postmodernism to focus on deconstructing powers that create oppression, effectively taking oppression itself “off the table” for deconstruction [46:47:00].

Manifestations of Applied Illiberalism

This applied turn led to specific theories that underlie much of what is seen in the public sphere today [04:26:00]:

• Strategic Essentialism A concept defined by postcolonial theorist Gayatari Spivak in the mid-1980s, it involves adopting negative stereotypes about oneself (in a self-aware, ironic way) to use as a weapon of resistance against power [48:17:00]. Crucially, it seeks to preserve existing power hierarchies but reverse their direction (e.g., “girl power” instead of eliminating gender hierarchy) [50:01:00].

• Postcolonial Theory This theory contends that Western concepts like reason and science are “properties” of white Western men, developed through historical contingencies in Europe [53:00:00]. Thus, efforts to teach science or emphasize reason in non-Western contexts are seen as “colonial acts” that erase indigenous cultures [54:03:00]. This perspective is deemed “conservativive in a weird way,” seeking to maintain a pre-modern, feudal state [57:52:00].

  A specific manifestation is “research justice,” which dictates that research has systemically excluded certain ideas and voices 01:06:06]. This leads to a demand to minimize citations and curricula from “white Western men” and instead prioritize “marginalized voices” (e.g., black women scholars), based on their identity rather than the validity of their work [01:06:50]. This “cooks the books” to give reputational standing to activists with specific identity markers [01:08:16].

• Queer Theory Queer theory radically rejects anything normal or normative, viewing it as constraining [01:19:24]. It opposed gay marriage because making gayness normative removes its “radical divergent” status [01:19:35]. It insists on making categories unstable and laughable, challenging the very idea of a stable category like “woman” [01:20:00]. This extends to the claim that biological sex itself is culturally constructed, a mere “medical terminology” imposed by doctors [01:21:01].

• Critical Race Theory (CRT) & Intersectionality CRT traces race as a social construct invented in the 16th century to justify racism, slavery, and colonialism [01:26:51]. While liberalism has aimed to remove the social significance of racial categories (leading to “color blindness” where race has no impact on life trajectory), CRT seeks to re-assert social significance in race to “reverse the power dynamic” [01:28:05]. It insists on an “identity-first approach” (e.g., “I am black” is more powerful than “I am a person who happens to be black”) [01:29:00]. CRT defines black culture in opposition to “white culture,” claiming that values like productivity, reliability, loyalty, punctuality, reason, and science are all forms of “white supremacy” [01:33:10]. This approach is seen as psychologically devastating for the groups it purports to help, leading to paranoia and pessimism by portraying the entire world as being against them [01:36:38].

The Dangers of Illiberalism [01:03:00]

These applied theories operate within a “hermetically sealed” worldview, ungrounded in facts or data [01:02:44]. Any criticism is dismissed as coming from a place that “doesn’t properly understand it,” using labels like “racist” or “sexist” [01:03:49]. Their epistemology is not based on truth or falsity, but on whether an idea is “problematic” and aligns with the “lived experience” of an oppressed social position [01:04:40]. Their ethics are defined by flipping over historical power imbalances (e.g., “unfairly advantaged” cultures must be reversed) [01:05:02]. This perspective is considered dangerously irrational and comparable to “neo-medievalism,” an attempt to reverse 500 years of progress [01:03:25].

While many academics privately disagree with these ideologies but are too afraid to speak up, the scholars and activists pushing these ideas are described as “painfully sincere” and wholeheartedly believe in their worldview [01:14:50].

How to Counter Illiberalism [01:41:00]

To counter this illiberal tide, several actions are suggested:

1. Listen Better: While their methods are flawed, acknowledging the call for greater listening is the one valid point [01:34:36].
2. Re-assert Liberalism: Actively remind people of core liberal principles and civics, which have been neglected in education [01:41:51].
3. Show Up: Engage in bureaucratic positions, committees, and local meetings (e.g., school boards) to prevent a small number of activists from dominating decisions [01:42:24].
4. Get Informed: Understand the “jibber jabber” of these theories and the liberal alternative [01:43:03].
5. Speak Up and Stand Firm: Don’t back down from name-calling or intimidation tactics [01:45:06]. Recognize that opponents rely on re-defining words and attempting to shame [01:45:53]. Individuals who adhere to liberalism have the moral and epistemological high ground, as they believe in science and universal benefit [01:46:47]. The moment one is afraid to speak up is precisely the moment to do so [01:46:28].