There's a little pessimism at the end of a great conversation and exposition. This is a special publication/project. How do we make the case for liberalism? I don't think we do. I think we take on the argument where it arises. In the past I have perhaps tongue in cheek made the argument for 'black Cartesianism'. Why? We can look at this from 2 sides. 1) I come into the world alone, I attempt to make sense of the world and my place in it, everything begins with me. 2) I am part of a family, community, some kind of class or social structure or nation. I find myself at a place in history where the institutions around me are fragmenting, I find myself isolated or atomised, I begin to doubt even myself. Do I even exist? As society fragments individuals become isolated and fearful, so we are not defending liberalism as such, we are defending the free individual.
I listened to a presentation on this site today by a young woman who made a compelling case for freedom of expression among black people, particularly where they have been led to believe that they have a higher loyalty to their race. In times of struggle political groups may need a untied front, even within liberal democracies political parties exercise collective responsibility. But this is a collective responsibility of people who have voluntarily signed up to an organisation, subscribe to its values and have an opportunity to make their disagreements known within the organisation. Today black people may find that on account of their colour they are assumed to hold certain views, or certain individuals presume to speak on their behalf without consultation. To react against this is not to defend liberal values as such, it is an instinctive reaction in defence of your own self-worth, self-interest, conscience or as sociologists say subjectivity. We can call it individualism, Cartesianism, subjectivity or whatever, but it's about personal integrity or autonomy, after all why do we object to racism? Historically we can see that liberal rights have not been universally enjoyed. We may see a reaction against liberalism by those who have been excluded. The argument that we need more liberalism not less is a difficult argument to make. I think I agree with the speakers that without some form of liberal settlement we are left with a war of all against all or 'might is right'.
Thank you for your reflections on the intersection of individualism, identity, and liberalism. It's understandable that the defense of liberalism may not always resonate with everyone, particularly those who feel excluded or misunderstood. Also, when one considers certain historical injustices, the resulting skepticism towards liberalism isn't surprising. Nonetheless, despite its limitations, I believe that a liberal framework is necessary and arguably the best means to maintain social order and justice.
Thanks Ada. I agree with you. As a caveat I didn't talk about Christianity. For black people in Africa, the Caribbean and the US, Christianity has remained resonant while The West has become increasingly secular. Some have called black lives matter a religion, my own view is that it is remarkably secular in contrast to the US civil rights movement in the 1960's which was grounded in Christianity. In the UK too we have perhaps see a generation or two of Westernised, educated, secular black people. Cynics have said that Christianity has been used to subdue colonised peoples, but it also has a liberatory appeal with ideas of individual equality and value (albeit before God). Arguably Liberalism is also grounded in Christianity. But that is a discussion for another time.
There's a little pessimism at the end of a great conversation and exposition. This is a special publication/project. How do we make the case for liberalism? I don't think we do. I think we take on the argument where it arises. In the past I have perhaps tongue in cheek made the argument for 'black Cartesianism'. Why? We can look at this from 2 sides. 1) I come into the world alone, I attempt to make sense of the world and my place in it, everything begins with me. 2) I am part of a family, community, some kind of class or social structure or nation. I find myself at a place in history where the institutions around me are fragmenting, I find myself isolated or atomised, I begin to doubt even myself. Do I even exist? As society fragments individuals become isolated and fearful, so we are not defending liberalism as such, we are defending the free individual.
I listened to a presentation on this site today by a young woman who made a compelling case for freedom of expression among black people, particularly where they have been led to believe that they have a higher loyalty to their race. In times of struggle political groups may need a untied front, even within liberal democracies political parties exercise collective responsibility. But this is a collective responsibility of people who have voluntarily signed up to an organisation, subscribe to its values and have an opportunity to make their disagreements known within the organisation. Today black people may find that on account of their colour they are assumed to hold certain views, or certain individuals presume to speak on their behalf without consultation. To react against this is not to defend liberal values as such, it is an instinctive reaction in defence of your own self-worth, self-interest, conscience or as sociologists say subjectivity. We can call it individualism, Cartesianism, subjectivity or whatever, but it's about personal integrity or autonomy, after all why do we object to racism? Historically we can see that liberal rights have not been universally enjoyed. We may see a reaction against liberalism by those who have been excluded. The argument that we need more liberalism not less is a difficult argument to make. I think I agree with the speakers that without some form of liberal settlement we are left with a war of all against all or 'might is right'.
Thank you for your reflections on the intersection of individualism, identity, and liberalism. It's understandable that the defense of liberalism may not always resonate with everyone, particularly those who feel excluded or misunderstood. Also, when one considers certain historical injustices, the resulting skepticism towards liberalism isn't surprising. Nonetheless, despite its limitations, I believe that a liberal framework is necessary and arguably the best means to maintain social order and justice.
Thanks Ada. I agree with you. As a caveat I didn't talk about Christianity. For black people in Africa, the Caribbean and the US, Christianity has remained resonant while The West has become increasingly secular. Some have called black lives matter a religion, my own view is that it is remarkably secular in contrast to the US civil rights movement in the 1960's which was grounded in Christianity. In the UK too we have perhaps see a generation or two of Westernised, educated, secular black people. Cynics have said that Christianity has been used to subdue colonised peoples, but it also has a liberatory appeal with ideas of individual equality and value (albeit before God). Arguably Liberalism is also grounded in Christianity. But that is a discussion for another time.