A number of blogs recently published James Burnham's list (from his 1964 book "The Suicide of the West") of questions that determine whether one is a "liberal" or not (in 1960's terms, of course). It's a very interesting list, not least because today's understanding of a political "liberal" is rather different from that of half a century ago. Burnham wrote:
A full-blown liberal will mark every one, or very nearly every one, of these thirty-nine sentences, Agree. A convinced conservative will mark many or most of them, a reactionary all or nearly all of them, Disagree.
By giving this test to a variety of groups, I have confirmed experimentally what is obvious enough from ordinary discourse, that the result is seldom an even balance between Agree and Disagree. The correlations are especially stable for individuals who are prepared to identify themselves unequivocally as either ’liberal’ or ’reactionary’: such self-defined liberals almost never drop below 85 percent of Agree answers, or self-defined reactionaries below 85 percent of Disagree; a perfect 100 percent is common. Certain types of self-styled conservatives yield almost as high a Disagree percentage as the admitted reactionaries. The answers of those who regard themselves as ’moderate conservatives’ or ’traditional conservatives’ and of the rather small number of persons who pretend to no general opinions about public matters show considerably more variation. But in general the responses from this list of thirty-nine sentences indicate that a liberal line can be drawn somewhere ... and that most persons fall fairly definitely (though not in equal numbers) on one side of it or the other.
These sentences were not devised arbitrarily. Many of them are taken directly or adapted from the writings of well-known liberals, the French Declaration of the Rights of Man, or liberal questionnaires that have been put out in recent years by the American Civil Liberties Union. The last eight are quoted verbatim from the United Nations’ ’Universal Declarations of Human Rights,’ adopted in 1948 by the United Nations General Assembly.
Courtesy of a New Criterion article from 2003, here's Burnham's list of questions.
1. All forms of racial segregation and discrimination are wrong.
2. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion.
3. Everyone has a right to free, public education.
4. Political, economic or social discrimination based on religious belief is wrong.
5. In political or military conflict it is wrong to use methods of torture and physical terror.
6. A popular movement or revolt against a tyranny or dictatorship is right, and deserves approval.
7. The government has a duty to provide for the ill, aged, unemployed and poor if they cannot take care of themselves.
8. Progressive income and inheritance taxes are the fairest form of taxation.
9. If reasonable compensation is made, the government of a nation has the legal and moral right to expropriate private property within its borders, whether owned by citizens or foreigners.
10. We have a duty to mankind; that is, to men in general.
11. The United Nations, even if limited in accomplishment, is a step in the right direction.
12. Any interference with free speech and free assembly, except for cases of immediate public danger or juvenile corruption, is wrong.
13. Wealthy nations, like the United States, have a duty to aid the less privileged portions of mankind.
14. Colonialism and imperialism are wrong.
15. Hotels, motels, stores and restaurants in southern United States ought to be obliged by law to allow Negroes to use all of their facilities on the same basis as whites.
16. The chief sources of delinquency and crime are ignorance, discrimination, poverty and exploitation.
17. Communists have a right to express their opinions.
18. We should always be ready to negotiate with the Soviet Union and other communist nations.
19. Corporal punishment, except possibly for small children, is wrong.
20. All nations and peoples, including the nations and peoples of Asia and Africa, have a right to political independence when a majority of the population wants it.
21. We always ought to respect the religious beliefs of others.
22. The primary goal of international policy in the nuclear age ought to be peace.
23. Except in cases of a clear threat to national security or, possibly, to juvenile morals, censorship is wrong.
24. Congressional investigating committees are dangerous institutions, and need to be watched and curbed if they are not to become a serious threat to freedom.
25. The money amount of school and university scholarships ought to be decided primarily by need.
26. Qualified teachers, at least at the university level, are entitled to academic freedom: that is, the right to express their own beliefs and opinions, in or out of the classroom, without interference from administrators, trustees, parents or public bodies.
27. In determining who is to be admitted to schools and universities, quota systems based on color, religion, family or similar factors are wrong.
28. The national government should guarantee that all adult citizens, except for criminals and the insane, should have the right to vote.
29. Joseph McCarthy was probably the most dangerous man in American public life during the fifteen years following the Second World War.
30. There are no significant differences in intellectual, moral or civilizing capacity among human races and ethnic types.
31. Steps toward world disarmament would be a good thing.
32. Everyone is entitled to political and social rights without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
33. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and expression.
34. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression.
35. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government.
36. Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security.
37. Everyone has the right to equal pay for equal work.
38. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions.
39. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
So, dear readers, how do you score?
Peter
21 comments:
As a general rule, I would put agree to most, if not all of these.
However, I need shades of grey.
"We should always be ready to negotiate..." Yes, maybe, but what?
And No 23. I disagree, not because censorship is OK, but because it is not justifiable in the situations indicated.
I shall stop commenting here. This test shows me as a liberal, but I have too many buts to be happy saying yes to many of them.
Me again.
It's all very well to talk about our rights.
What about our obligations and duties? They are just as important
"Everyone has a right to free, public education."
I know what they're trying to say, but I can't agree with it how it is said.
Providing for the education, at public expense, of all minors seems to be a public good that far exceeds the value of the public damage taxation causes.
Government-run schools, however, do not seem to be delivering on that public good, and are also magnets for progressive propaganda and agendas, as well as the most cockamamie theories in youth education that should properly be characterized as unregulated and unethical behavioral experiments on children. Literacy, numeracy and the ability to think coherently and convey those thoughts in writing and word are being given short shrift in favor of 'inclusion' and 'diversity' and 'social justice' and 'self esteem'. Those who pay the gold make the rules, and thus when government provides the schools, the schools support the power of government before any other consideration.
Further, I think the question is also trying to support publicly funded higher education for those beyond their majority. One result of the default assumption that everyone will go on to college is that the K-12 system does not feel under the gun to get the student literate, numerate and coherent, so these essential skills are very often being left for remedial classes at the collegiate level. At the age of majority, you should stand on your own two feet, and fund your education through work, scholarship or something akin to the ROTC program (not necessarily military, but necessarily to provide an essential public service).
Rephrase the question as "All minors should be provided funding, at public expense, for their education", and I can agree to that.
After that, it should be up to the parents to put their child in the school that meets that child's educational needs, as determined by capability, not age. Frankly, if a child is a quick learner, those educational vouchers should be acceptable at any college.
The test would have me as a liberal - BUT as mentioned, that's the OLD version, wherein MY liberty and the other fellow's liberty are both precious and degrading one degrades the other. Nowadays... well, the test is outdated, though "progressives" (which are ANTI-progress, really) would disagree. They claim the moral high ground... as they undermine it.
One "yes" answer.
#2 - Yes, people have the right to their own opinion. It's not like we have mind reading machines. They also have the right to keep their mouths shut and not show how foolish/different/evil they are. Thoughts are private, words and actions are public.
A couple others that are "sort of, but not really."
Agree 17
Disagree 20
Depends 2
Areas of disagreement:
3. Everyone has a right to free, public education.
Public Education has become public indoctrination, nor does it meet the classical definition of a Right.
4. Political, economic or social discrimination based on religious belief is wrong.
mohammedeism is incompatible with Western Soceity.
7. The government has a duty to provide for the ill, aged, unemployed and poor if they cannot take care of themselves.
The Government should only pay for goods and services, including deferred compensation of Government employees.
8. Progressive income and inheritance taxes are the fairest form of taxation.
Every citizen needs to have skin in the game.
11. The United Nations, even if limited in accomplishment, is a step in the right direction.
The United Nations has predictably devolved into a country club for tyrants.
13. Wealthy nations, like the United States, have a duty to aid the less privileged portions of mankind.
Has not worked out.
14. Colonialism and imperialism are wrong.
Less wrong than the politically induced famines and genocides which often replace them.
16. The chief sources of delinquency and crime are ignorance, discrimination, poverty and exploitation.
Chief sources of delinquency and crime are home environments and parental care which fail to instill civilization in the young.
19. Corporal punishment, except possibly for small children, is wrong.
That which is effective is seldom wrong.
22. The primary goal of international policy in the nuclear age ought to be peace.
Peace is the rare condition in which active warfare is not being wages. As long as old Adam walks the face of the Earth, there will be war.
24. D. Congressional investigating committees are dangerous institutions, and need to be watched and curbed if they are not to become a serious threat to freedom.
25. D. The money amount of school and university scholarships ought to be decided primarily by need.
Since most are charitable in nature it is entirely at the discretion of the entity funding the scholarship.
26. D. Qualified teachers, at least at the university level, are entitled to academic freedom: that is, the right to express their own beliefs and opinions, in or out of the classroom, without interference from administrators, trustees, parents or public bodies.
This has utterly failed. Time to end it.
29. Joseph McCarthy was probably the most dangerous man in American public life during the fifteen years following the Second World War.
Alinksy.
31. Steps toward world disarmament would be a good thing.
Interesting failed experiment.
32. D. Everyone is entitled to political and social rights without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
mohammedeism is incompatible with Western Soceity, and seems to assume "Rights" which fail on definitional grounds.
36. Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security.
What cannot be paid, eventually shall not be paid.
37. Everyone has the right to equal pay for equal work.
38. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions.
Not for public employees.
39. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
Nope. There is a limit to other people's money.
15 Agree
24 Disagree
You can also tell how dated the test is when they ask about McCarthy, when in hindsight, and in light of Russian files unavailable before the fall of the Soviet union, it has turned out he was just about completely right.
The Overton Window shifted very far to the left after these questions came out, partly due to Gramscian Damage.
I ended up with 4-5 agree, the rest disagree. But I had to think of things rather than just do knee-jerk reactions.
Yes - 22
No - 17
Lots of these questions have assumptions behind them that may or may not be correct.
Rodney Graves wrote:
"4. Political, economic or social discrimination based on religious belief is wrong.
mohammedeism is incompatible with Western Soceity."
Islam is not a religion, or maybe it is better to say that Islam encompasses in a single system everything we think of as "religion", "government", and "life style". Further it denies that what we think of as separate parts of life can be separated. This results in the Islamic not understanding Western society. Separation of church and state is meaningless to the Islamic. They can't be separated. Further, it results in those who believe that religious freedom is an absolute, failing to recognize that the governmental and legal aspects of Islam are totally incompatible with our system of government.
Heh, depends on how deeply one thinks about the question(s), and how much interrelation there is between questions. I could probably come up with three different sets of for/against.
not at all well, depending on one's definition of welll. I suspect if Abe Lincoln and I took the test we'd score about the same.
suburban replied:
"Islam is not a religion, or maybe it is better to say that Islam encompasses in a single system everything we think of as "religion", "government", and "life style". Further it denies that what we think of as separate parts of life can be separated. This results in the Islamic not understanding Western society. Separation of church and state is meaningless to the Islamic. They can't be separated. Further, it results in those who believe that religious freedom is an absolute, failing to recognize that the governmental and legal aspects of Islam are totally incompatible with our system of government."
Thus why I am unwilling to extend the customary tolerance to the sons of the false prophet.
That would be classic liberalism to you fella..
That's what I learned about liberalism, that you respect everyone's freedom. Then the marxists decided along the way that just stating what they were for needed better marketing, so they took on false labels.
In essence I agree with most of the list, but the list presumes fair and honest systems within which we can operate openly on our own terms. Not the self-enforcing rotting institutions that are our education/union/political/news media complex.
Disagree: 16
Agree: 17
These ones I couldn't give a yea or nay.
5. In political or military conflict it is wrong to use methods of torture and physical terror.
5. Hard to say. How extreme are the circumstances?
10. We have a duty to mankind; that is, to men in general.
10. Gibberish.
11. The United Nations, even if limited in accomplishment, is a step in the right direction.
11. What direction?
22. The primary goal of international policy in the nuclear age ought to be peace.
22. What is 'international policy'?
24. Congressional investigating committees are dangerous institutions, and need to be watched and curbed if they are not to become a serious threat to freedom.
24. Lol. No, only congressional investigating committees investigating communists are wrong. The ones investigating fictional Russian collusion with Donald Trumps campaign are fantastic and absolutely necessary because reasons. Communists are a vastly more serious threat to freedom than congressional committees.
I found this questionnaire surprisingly difficult. I suppose we're expected to answer immediately, without thought, but just depending on our own personal ethics. But I could not avoid answering nearly all of them, "Well, it depends...."
For example, "Communists have a right to express their opinions."
Well, not under Communism, they don't.
2. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion.
Yes. As the doctor said when a patient asked for a second opinion, " You are wearing an ugly tie. " But everyone is not entitled to his own facts.
Climate change and gun control are obvious attempts to point general opinion in a specific direction, demanding more government control of everyday life. Both, in a court room statement, " assumes facts not in evidence. "
The desired direction of the questions is clear.
Agree: 12
Disagree: 16
Want to quibble with categorical nature of statements with which I generally agree or disagree: 11
There is a lot of ambiguity to these questions, for example, #17:
"17. Communists have a right to express their opinions."
There seems to be assumptions there that are unstated.
I interpret this statement to refer to the right of communists to be treated like any other normal person; that communists have a sacred right to be hired to work in the government, the media, academia, etc, and spew their evil ideology and to say they shouldn't be hired is a violation of their human rights.
I don't believe commies have an inherent sacred right to be funded and promoted so they can spread their propaganda on other people's dimes.
I wish this commenting engine had more ways to offer "likes".
My answer to most of these questions comes in two parts:
1. "It depends."
2. What kind of a shallow-minded, bomb-throwing hater of goodness thinks these are good "yes or no" questions?
Post a Comment