The five worldviews that define American politics
Michael Lind - Jan 11, 2011
Does it often seem that many American politicians and pundits are talking past each other? That is because they really are. The frustrating nature of public debate arises in large part from the fact that Americans do not share a single worldview.
A worldview is a more or less coherent understanding of the nature of reality, which permits its holders to interpret new information in light of their preconceptions. Clashes among worldviews cannot be ended by a simple appeal to facts. Even if rival sides agree on the facts, people may disagree on conclusions because of their different premises.
Both the conservative and liberal camps include people with different and sometimes incompatible worldviews. American public debate is arguably dominated by five significant political worldviews: neoliberal globalism, social democratic liberalism, populist nationalism, libertarian isolationism and Green Malthusianism.
Tags: Malthusians
PERFECTIBILISTS: The 18th Century Bavarian Order of the Illuminati
The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship
Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism
Fire in the Minds of Men: Origins of the Revolutionary Faith
America's Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull & Bones
February 23rd, 2011 at 4:24 pm
Though I agree with much of Michael Lind’s analysis, especially his critique of radical Malthusians, after a bit of research I’m still somewhat suspicious of his seemingly moderate position. His organization the New America Foundation lists amongst it’s major financial contributors the following Globalist Entities just to name a few.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
The Open Society Institute
The Ford Foundation
The Rockefeller Foundation
The Carnegie Corporation of New York
ExxonMobil Corporation
Google, Inc.
The Levi Strauss Foundation
Microsoft Corporation
And that’s just the one’s that made a blip on my conspiracy theorist radar. The full list is available here. http://newamerica.net/about/funding Maybe someone else will notice some scary groups I’m unaware of.
To their credit, at least they’re open about their funding. And despite the Soros funding Lind has even written an article advising liberal pundits to back off Glenn Beck, albeit because he believes focus on Beck makes other crazy populists appear more centrist. As far as I’m concern the whole mainstream media “back and forth” amounts to little more than a snowball fight at a loony bin with the doctors placing bets on both sides.
It’s somewhat strange that some these groups are willing to fund an anti-malthusian anti-peak oil theory writer like Lind, given their history of stealth eugenics under the guise of environmentalism and supposed resource scarcity.
Anyone have any thoughts on all this?