Menu

Strategies

Vision

, 0

The Future Starts Now

Imagine a world where people politely agreed to disagree. Imagine a political apparatus that administered mutual respect to all citizens equally. Imagine liberty and justice for all.

It may seem far fetched, but this is the ideal we envision. We envision lively political engagement that emphasizes positive, productive conversations. We envision the very best ideas being agreed upon by all.

Surely there must be some common ground. Surely we can find agreement that is grounded in our shared humanity. Surely it’s not beyond our capacity to communicate and collaborate with people across the political spectrum.

It is not productive to be pessimistic. It is not possible to progress as we are, bitterly divided over emotional ideals. It is not logical to force millions of people to disavow their personal convictions.

It is not reasonable for the federal government to accurately represent the vast diversity of local constituents. It is not realistic to micro manage the masses without infringing upon personal freedoms. It is not wise to regulate according to party platform.

Indeed, the time is ripe for revolution. We need a revolution of thought, a grand realization of the inherent limitations of human leadership. It is time we acknowledge the inherent conflicts between the power of government and the liberty of citizens. 

It is time we shift the political paradigm. We must push aside propaganda, reject the two-party platform, and take control of the political conversation. It is time to crush the status quo with the weight of political logic. Our progress depends on it.

If you resonate with this vision, then it’s time to get involved. When we say that YOU are the solution, we’re talking to you. It’s your intelligence, your passion, and your concern as a citizen that will save our country from imminent self-destruction.

Virtue

, 0

Good Governing Virtues

Like values, virtues can be a broad and disagreeable subject. Rather than diverge into philosophical debate, we’ll just come right out and say it. There are three virtues that are relevant to political context, and are therefore worth fussing about:

Honesty

In order to make an accurate assessment of the challenges we are facing, we must be honest.

Being honest means expanding the scope of consideration beyond the narrow and constricting political trenches. Being honest means admitting when something doesn’t make sense.

We must be honest with ourselves as we evaluate our personal politics. Being honest means acknowledging when something does work, even when it sounds like a really good idea.

Humility

Humility is simply acknowledging the limits of our own understanding. It is humility that helps us shed the insidious assumption of super knowledge.

Humility in politics almost feels faux pas. Politicians get elected because they convey the greatest degree of certainty and conviction. We are easily convinced that everyone else is wrong. 

Nevertheless, in order to get beyond the current political impasse, a healthy dose of humility is in order, and it should be administered across the board.

Honor

To honor means to show respect. We should honor our own traditions and respect the traditions of others. That is a lot easier to do when we are humble and honest with ourselves.

Honor extends beyond showing respect toward political opponents. On a deeper level, we need to honor one another out of respect for our shared humanity. We should honor the human condition.

Honoring the human condition is an anecdote to intolerable arrogance and misplaced judgement. That makes this virtue indispensable to civil political discourse.

Much more could and should be said about these virtues.

Sign up and stay tuned for Sam to pontificate in his upcoming podcast. 

Values

, 0

What are they and why do they matter?

According to the dictionary, personal values are ideas that we feel emotionally invested in. When we feel emotionally attached to a political concept or a cause, it is because it aligns with our personal values.

Childhood circumstance, individual personality and proclivities, religious affiliations, formal education, institutional conditioning, and political propaganda all have a heavy influence on personal values.

The diversity of American values is readily observable. To say that we don’t all share the same values would be a gross understatement. Values have become an increasingly contentious topic in recent decades. Why is that?

The Power of Emotional Appeal

No doubt there has been a convergence of factors. Technology has proliferated the spread of information. Religious values have been replaced by secular values. Political platforms have become more consolidated and polarized.

Empowered by market research, emboldened by unimaginable success, the purveyors of political values have nearly perfected emotional appeal. The result is that political action is now driven more by muddled emotions than clear-minded critical thinking.

Speculation may abound, but it seems reasonable to suspect some degree of intentional manipulation and social engineering. Politicians have become so proficient at plucking our heart strings, we’ve become enchanted with many seductive ideals.

 Logical Values

Science is making progress in understanding why we do the things we do.

We are motivated by emotion. Logic is only loosely used to rationalize our decisions and support our values. It’s a fascinating part of being human.

Of course, this isn’t a post on behavioral psychology. So let me cut to the chase.

Personal values are inherently linked to political convictions. Since emotional confrontations shutdown critical thinking, we need to mitigate the impact of clashing values when developing public policy.

To be blunt, we cannot keep trying to force people with different values to agree with us. It is as asinine as it is impossible. For this reason, it is critical that we shift the political debate away from emotionally charged values, toward unemotional, logical conclusions.

That said, values are still important. They work to inform us of moral parameters, to keep our self-interest in check, and provide a template for constructive collaboration. That said, it seems unrealistic to try and establish a robust set of shared American values.

Our exorbitant diversity would deny any attempt at doing so.

So, in an effort to stake out some common ground, and for the sake of simplicity, we at CriticalPolitical.org will only advocate a very concise set of logical values. It is critical to understand that we are only evaluating these values in the political context.

Values that stoke emotional reactions are not logical. Values that breed political division are not logical. Values that can only be defined by convoluted conceptualizations are not logical.

Values that cannot be practically implemented are not logical.

Come to think of it, the vast majority of values may prove to be completely illogical when considered in the political context. If people can’t agree as to the value of the values, what value is there?

The Three Great Values

You may agree or disagree, but we believe the following values are essential pillars for a healthy society.

Individual Liberty

We believe that individual liberty is the foundation for any free society. Distilled to its essence, liberty is embodied in our freedom of choice and constrained only by social responsibility and judicial equality.

Clearly this is not intended to be an exhaustive exposition on the complexities of liberty. This concept of liberty could be summed up in two sayings: “Different strokes for different folks,” and, “Live and let live.”

We can work together to support and protect our collective liberties, but let’s not try to tell each other how to live our lives.

Social Responsibility

Social responsibility requires an evaluation of personal impact on the people around us. This concept provides an implicit accountability for individual behavior. How we behave matters.

Social responsibility is not to be mistaken for “collective” responsibility. It is not that we are responsible for others, but that we are responsible to others. This is a critical distinction.

What is most important to grasp here, is that the value of social responsibility is simply an extension of self-responsibility. It is not a moral imperative to crusade for political collectivism.

Judicial Equality

Judicial equality means ensuring that all laws are applied to all citizens in a uniform fashion. The process of enforcing accountability must be fair, predictable, and impartial.

If the United States judicial system was operating effectively, it would difficult to devise a better process. However, common law has been corrupted by special interests and perverse political exploitation.

Equal justice under the law is an ideal value that has been under assault for generations. The modern interpretation of social justice has taken an emotional slant that now favors personal bias over individual liberty and social responsibility.

Shifting the Paradigm

A big part of shifting the political paradigm is exploring the logical role of values in the political process. That means forgoing the assumption we all share the same values, and lessening the impact of emotional appeal.

Why? Because if we don’t, political collaboration will forever be compromised by emotional conflicts. Living in a peaceful society, expressing political convictions, and enjoying individual freedom will quickly become a thing of the past.

Political Strategies

, , 4

So, the 2018 midterm elections have come and gone. Did you vote? Do you feel thrilled about the outcome? Are you dismayed? What is the world going to look like for the next two years?

Honestly, who the hell knows.

When talking about political strategies, it is critical that we make macro-level considerations. These mid-terms were hyped up as historic. Of course, history is being made every day.

In the bigger picture, the entrenched political establishment, and the problems they foment, are as alive and active as ever. Thus, individual liberties and old fashion commonsense are still under attack, daily.

To sketch a broad vision of an over-arching political strategy, I would like to offer the following objectives:

  1. Let’s agree to disagree. Rather than trying to mediate with a mental illness, let’s shift the starting point of conversation. If we start by acknowledging our differences and agreeing to disagree, we can then turn our attention to issues far more important than party platform.
  2. Let’s infiltrate the institutions. Rather than allow our perspectives to be socially engineered by academia, political parties, or religious institutions, let’s start to seriously question everything we’ve ever been taught. Treat everything like propaganda and apply the principles of logic to extract independent conclusions.
  3. Let’s let logic lead the way. When we are looking for solutions to political problems, let’s proceed with logic rather than emotional conviction. We must evaluate the merits of proposed political initiative with mathematical precision. Wishful thinking will only walk us further into depravity.

If these three ideas could be adapted by an increasing percentage of the population, then political progress would probably get some traction. Until then, we are doomed to endure the worst of political insanity as it plays out on a national scale.

Here are a couple of proposed personal actions:

  1. Make a list of your personal beliefs, maybe like a “Top Ten Political Convictions” or something similar. The idea here is to get your assumptions out on paper, so that you can begin to examine them empirically.
  2. Intentionally pry at each point with a few of these questions:
    • Where did I first get this idea?
    • What evidence do I use to support this perspective?
    • What are the arguments people have against it?
    • Why do I feel that I am right and they are wrong?
  3. You might take this a step further, and engage a friend that you generally disagree with. Ask them to explain their political perspectives, commit to keeping your mouth shut, and just listen. Thank them for their time, then ask yourself:
    • What part of their perspective was most thought provoking?
    • What part did you most disagree with?
    • What is your reasoning for disagreeing?

You would probably benefit from writing down your answers. It helps to have it spelled out in front of you.

Understanding your own position is the first step. Understanding your opponents is the second. Reconciling the discrepancies between the two is the third.

In time, more resources will be posted to help you do just that.

Bringing it all together.

, , , , 0

This is where logic meets laughter.

Here we can laugh at ignorance and idiocy, shit-can political correctness, and pick at the scab of festering emotional wounds. We won’t tone it down, skirt the issue, or try to be nice. Instead, we’ll call it like it is, bash the bias, and call bullshit on the bullshit.

Does that sound refreshing?

If so, you’re in for a treat.