Liberal Lie #2

B) Man becomes bad only through injustices in the environment.  Therefore the role of any government or institution is to rid the society of all injustice.

This argument of liberalism is the centerpiece of its philosophy because once a person accepts this then life becomes a series of injustices that need to be remedied.  The irony of this argument is that life will always be full of injustices and if these injustices need to be removed who can remove them?

I will give 3 reasons why this liberal argument is false.

Reason 1: There are people who are still able to live meaningful lives despite injustices in their environment.  Victor Frankl, a holocaust survivor was able to find meaning despite his horrible circumstances; so much so that he developed a new school of psychology.  Nelson Mandela was able to survive 27 years of imprisonment and was able to forgive his captors and lead his country into freedom.  Now this logical criticism will arise: But these examples are extraordinary exceptions which happen in very rare circumstances therefore they are null. Nature proves otherwise. A law is a law in all cases regardless of exceptions. Now a person can manipulate natural laws such as in the case of gravity where airplanes do so everyday.  But even if airplanes are able to manipulate gravity it doesn't prove that gravity doesn't exist.  So if the environment did determine a person's behavior then it would be true in all cases. But since this isn't the case it therefore isn't true.  The converse then becomes true that a person shapes their environment.

Reason 2:  No other entity besides the person can influence their own decisions.  It is true that a government can provide legitimate incentives to encourage positive behavior.  An example of this are charter schools which are funded by the government which stress a more competitive environment to improve overall behavior.  There is a certain truth that the environment can definitely shape behaviors.  But there are also cases where the environment doesn't do this as is stated in my first reason.  With that being said it doesn't take into account a person's role in the change.  Somewhere during the process a person had to make a decision to change their behavior.  Whether this was done concretely or passively the person still exerted their will into the situation.  All behavioral changes whether using the will or not require the use of the will.  A person doesn't simply change without his or her consent.  A person can be forced through strong environmental factors such as through government coercion, totalitarian leaderships, troubled neighborhoods to act in a certain way.  But still in spite of the circumstances the person still made a choice to fit into their environment.  The choice to resist is always there no matter the consequences.  Therefore the power to change always comes from the person not an outside entity.  

Reason 3: Injustice will always exist no matter how altruistic the aims of a society might be. It is true that a society should do everything in its power to rid all injustices.  But injustice will always exist since humans are imperfect.  Imperfection is a form of injustice because every human craves perfection.  This craving implies a sort of unity that doesn't exist in this world.  Furthermore nature is replete with injustices.  The lion will always kill the gazelle.  Flowers bloom and die. Predators will always destroy their prey.  Strangely these injustices balance out the natural world and act as a series of checks and balances.  In human nature injustice can serve as a catalyst for change or can serve as painful reminder that there is more to existence then what there is. Because if human existence was just then there would be no injustice, but since this is not the case injustice will always exist.  The best any society can do is to limit as much as possible the cases of injustice.


Popular Posts