>>191
Why do I believe humanity would stagnate?
Left=Liberal=Progressive vs. Right=Conservative=Regressive
It's just the nature of the beast. I wrote this in a thread a while ago:
Conservatives want things to stay as they are, or move backwards. Liberals want to move things forward. Conservatives believe that the things that we have known for a long time are the most important things, because they are what make us what we are, so they endeavor to preserve them. Liberals believe that the new things we have learned are the most important, because it is often a failure to understand these things that causes most of the direct suffering, so they endeavor to implement them.
But there are many bad old ideas that conservatives cling to. And there are many bad new ideas that liberals cleave to.
Each wishes only to prevent suffering.
Liberals are more willing to sacrifice certain behaviors in the interests of cooperation and progress.
Conservatives believe that the sacrifice of some of these behaviors is a bad idea that will change us for the worse. Sometimes they are correct.
The liberals are the people to thank for progress. But they're also the ones to blame when fundamentals are abandoned and chaos ensues. The liberals are the brain, and the courage. The conservatives are the backbone, and the spirit.
An environment that is politically, economically, intellectually, spiritually, and socially conservative, and they're adherents do tend to bunch together, is not capable of conceiving, nurturing, and implementing new ideas as quickly as a liberal environment. Anywhere near as quickly. So slowly that I think the use of the wore stagnate is fair. I'm reminded of the old conservative complaints about liberal intellectuals and liberalism in Universities. It's not that they are smarter per se, but there is a much greater tendency among liberals to experiment and take risks.
Regarding "economics", I am not referring to Keynesian/Austrian "schools" or any of the other purely speculative nonsense that people continue to create to prop up a system with fundamental flaws. No amount of witchcraft will ever be able to support a large society based primarily on how it distributes it's resources. I do have a plan, but this is already getting tl.
Well the thing is there's really not much difference between the left or right or Republicans and Democrats. They're both big spenders and they're both for bigger government.
In practice, I agree.
And there has only ever been one ethical way to promote a philosophy: Lead by example.