The Liberal Mind – A culture-free universal morality

George Rebane

In discussions on these pages during the last months a new aspect of the liberal mind has revealed itself.  It has always been there, but those of us not blessed with the thinking abilities of the liberal mind seem to overlook this strong characteristic of progressive thought.  And this is that there exists some universal overarching set of morals that 1) is totally independent of and not anchored in any cultural framework, and 2) that the tenets of this universal morality should be imposed on a selective, as needed basis, to promote the spread of collectivistic society.  (My own thoughts about morality are here.)

A corollary to the existence of such universal morality is that access to it as a reliable standard with which to laud and/or lament other peoples’ behavior is reserved for the extra-cultural collectivist – people who admit to no cultural membership, judge all cultures to be of equal merit to humankind, and would prefer that cultural boundaries disappear from the face of the earth.  To promote the latter goal, they all foster and celebrate multiculturalism in western societies, knowing what effect such social tolerances have on each culture so compacted.

Universal morality is the prime unstated basis for large masses of people being persuaded and aggregated by such notions as ‘income equality’, ‘social justice’, ‘social fairness’, and a never-ending expansion of ‘rights’ whose implementation is funded by others belonging to ‘predatory’ classes that are the cause of the world’s problems.

Universal morality is supra-legal.  It can be used to variously indict those who have prospered through no infraction of a country’s laws.  By ‘variously indict’ I mean that the tenets of universal morality can be fashioned at will out of whole cloth for a cause célèbre du jour, and then abandoned when/if they become inconvenient for the next engagement.  It is for this reason that it is hard to nail any of these tenets to the wall.

[In an apparent attempt at a universal morality, a Dr Kent M. Keith, Ed.D. has copyrighted(!?) and sells what to him is ‘The Universal Moral Code’.  It’s not clear whether he wants you to ask permission before attempting to put any of the code’s tenets into practice.  Nevertheless, their examination reveals that there is little more there than what we are taught in the Judeo-Christian tradition.  Most certainly the interpretation of their adherence or violation is no easier, and in a more perfect social order such interpretation and enforcement should be left to “servant-leaders” of “existing major institutions” transformed by “new regenerative forces operat(ing) within them.”  The institutionally naked individual apparently has no place in a new world adhering to universal morality.]

Comments

[Todd Juvinall]

The left in our country is energized to deem people like the Koch Brothers as "bad" even though they don't break any laws yet these same outraged people say nothing about the mono-culture of Islam. These outraged progressives live in the freest, most diverse country in the history of the planet where almost anything goes or is possible yet they are as unhappy here as they would be under the Mullahs. Go figure.

[Scott Obermuller]

The over-riding theme with libs these days is 'social justice'. They believe that chanting this mantra will cause them to elevate to a higher plane. I would be interested in a definition of this clap trap, but every time I ask a devotee, it's a different story. One interesting reply was that since I had to ask, I obviously wasn't interested in hearing the truth.
Libs have many heart-felt beliefs. The problem is they seem to change daily. This is the core of the progressive movement. Once it's pointed out that they are not following their own previous beliefs, they "progress" to another. I've always labeled it: I want what I want.
As long as folks cop to that tenet, I feel that they are at least being honest.
Please let's not try to gin up a halo with the idea that justice is involved.

[Paul Emery]

Todd

The Arkansas chicken folks (Tyson) also were coined as "bad" on these pages without any evidence they broke any laws when it came to the Clinton dealings described. I asked for details but heard only silence.

[Douglas Keachie]

On my ideal parallel universe, it would be common sense to implement the ideas outlined here, back in 1959: http://books.google.com/books?id=EEoEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA20&lpg=PA20&dq=Frank+Manson,+Commander,+U.S.+Navy&source=bl&ots=MVY5LCbois&sig=_2YpJY-En_qzfJqAWutIDMXewj8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=eSkFT4LLG4mMiAKOrcWUDQ&ved=0CFoQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Frank%20Manson%2C%20Commander%2C%20U.S.%20Navy&f=false

I have established a facebook group supporting this concept, here: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=438628365506

Please explain the connection between your one size fits all and these concepts, thanks, Doug

[Todd Juvinall]

PaulE, I googled Tyson Foods fined clinton and there are a few articles there. I would think a fellow as bright as you and techno-smart would have done that.

[Paul Emery]

Close but no cigar Todd. That's chump change compared to the 400 million the Koch bros have been fined.

"From 1999 through 2003, Koch Industries was assessed more than $400 million in fines, penalties and judgments."

Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2011/10/03/bloomberg-investigates-the-koch-brothers/#ixzz1iYx3y12b

Besides it had nothing to do directly with Clinton but with minor appointee USDA Secretary Mike Espy who resigned but was later acquitted. Innocent until proven guilty as you say, right Todd. I knew you'd take the bait.

"What a hoot"

[Gregory]

Golly, Paul, following the link to wikipedia article would have been a fine start. The Attorney General of Arkansas at the time (Bill Clinton) probably had a clue that there was an appearance of bribery and fraud, but chose not to do anything about it. When it came to light later, the statutes of limitation might have kept the Clinton Justice Department from getting excited about it.

The press conference Hillary conducted found her in a demure pink suit, and the Washington Press corps was so enamored with her poise, things like her crediting of WSJ articles on cattle futures with her success the fact that there were no WSJ articles on cattle futures at the time just didn't carry much weight.

Try googling
"pretty in pink" "cattle futures" Andrea Mitchell
for an interesting take. The Pretty in Pink show was at the same time as Clinton's bombing of Serbia and Richard Nixon was dying, and the whole thing got buried.

Yes, HC took $100K laundered though a shady commodities dealer and got a pass. Jim Blair, who figured prominently in the scandal, was Tyson's general counsel at the time.

[Paul Emery]

Gregory

Show me a crime was committed and there was a conviction with "cattle futures" You're doing the same thing you accused me of.

[Gregory]

Golly, Paul, sometimes the crook gets away with it.

You allege an ethics breach when a company follows the law, and when the President found, in 2007, that Iraq was behind attacks, Koch Industries stopped their subsidiaries from doing more business with them. That's not a problem with ethics, that's Ethical.

Hillary Clinton had Cattlegate, and the missing subpoenaed Rose Law firm billing records were also found to be in the White House living area. We could go on, even their own side has been known to be saddened about how unethical they are ... "Everybody in politics lies, but they do it with such ease, it's troubling." -David Geffen on Billary. Funny how *real* criminal and ethical violations get ignored when they're inconvenient for the Emerys of the world.

In short, Paul, what I'm doing is the exact opposite of what you are doing. I saw smoke and found fire, you found nothing but are convinced if everyone looked hard enough we'd find some smoke.

[Paul Emery]

Bottom line, no conviction no crime. Innocent till proven guilty. Ask Todd. He'll back me up. I accuse the Bros and their beneficiaries of gross hypocrisy. I long ago conceded no crime was committed in that case. The 400 million in various fines and penalties speaks for itself as to the integrity of the brothers.

We can also go into the family traditions of supporting Nazi's and Commies if necessary to round off their portfolio.

[Todd Juvinall]

A fine can be a as simple as a regulation not being implemented. No law broken. Same thing PaulE.

[Paul Emery]

Yes, just a simple 400 million worth

Federal regulations are the actual enforceable laws authorized by Congressional legislation

[Douglas Keachie]

"A fine can be a as simple as a regulation not being implemented" Are you talking building codes, Todd Like maybe the Koch's used 16 gauge wire for the ovens, by mistake, and then got fined, and had to rip them out and replace with #8 ?

[Douglas Keachie]

It should come as no surprise to Greg that this was the number one single on the day I was born. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxUbhWF-rbI but by different artists. I like Gene Autry, shown here, doing "Don't Fence Me In." This is a new fad going around on FB.

[Todd Juvinall]

There does not have to be an arrest to break a regulation. Like Tyson and their bacterial problems. Millions in fines, no arrests. Or like Obama's pals who donated millions of dollars without disclosing the donors as required, fined, no arrests. Etc.

[Douglas Keachie]

Or Wanda's response here: http://sierrafoothillsreport.com/2012/01/05/dont-take-your-guns-to-town-son/#comment-44111

[Paul Emery]

They call it a citation not an arrest. That's what the county is likely to enact to regulate marijuana growers in NC. No need to use the police just an inspector with a clipboard.

Please point me to the Obama pals you refer to. I'd like to check out who was fined as you contend.

[Gregory]

"Bottom line, no conviction no crime."

So Paul, because OJ wasn't convicted, there was no crime committed?

Interesting concept.

In order to use the state powers to punish a court must find one guilty, but the citizenry can refer to someone as being a murderer or a crook with a much lower standard of evidence.

Bill Clinton was disbarred in Arkansas for perjury, a crime, without being found guilty of the crime of perjury. How did that happen?

[Paul Emery]

Because the "Bar" seems to be some kind of trade group that sets their own sandards.

There was a crime in the OJ situation because there was obviously a victim. It goes on the books as an unsolved crime. In order for there to be a crime there has to be an indictment. In the case of the chicken greaseballs as applied to Clintos I don't think it was ever established that there ever was a crime let alone an indictment. Accusations yes, indictment I don't think so since there never was a trial or a defendant.

As for this
"but the citizenry can refer to someone as being a murderer or a crook with a much lower standard of evidence."

Yes indeed they can. Shall we return to lynch mobs to fill in the blanks?

Again when we were talking about MM you said

"I too am troubled by the "guilty" until proven innocent on Meckler's local permit. It doesn't sound legal or right to me. Where is the due process?"

Good question Todd. Your ball.

[Paul Emery]

Correction

In order for there to be an indictment there has to be a crime.

[Gregory]

There's a big difference between a lynch mob and the freedom to call a crook a crook. Paul, you're obviously just flinging your rhetoric into the fan and hoping some of it sticks.

There's obviously a crime when securities fraud is committed in order to launder an under the table payment to the wife of a powerful public official, and there's obviously a victim when a lawyer lies under oath in order to avoid civil damages.

[Paul Emery]

You offered an "allegation" that securities fraud was committed. Please show me evidence of an indictment and how it involved the Clintons.

[Gregory]

Golly, Paul, even Mrs. Clinton disclosed in the Pretty in Pink press conference and multiple press contacts that, with no experience, she parlayed $1,000 into $100,000 in less than a year with cattle futures trading. Then she stopped and took her winnings.

These are widely known to have been unassigned trades, in that the broker, "Red" Bone (who has been found guilty in other shady dealings), made a bunch of trades in a day and later recorded which were which. Another 'trader' in the pool was Tyson's counsel.

Statisticians (check the wiki I linked) showed that the odds were about 30 trillion to one that one could guess in that market and make a 9900% gain in one year.

As I said, Arkansas Atty. General William J. Clinton probably knew about it at the time but for some reason didn't report her to the SEC. But, since no indictment, no crime. These aren't the droids you're looking for. Move along.

[Douglas Keachie]

Greg, with another famous quote from "Steak Wars."