A clear element of lay liberalism - as opposed to technocratic professional liberalism, is that there is a belief that 1) if people only knew the negative social, political, economic or ecological consequences of their actions then they wouldn't engage in the activities that produce these (surely unintended) consequences because 2) everybody (surely) agrees that doing stuff that hurts others (or nature) is bad and 3) no one really wants to do bad stuff.
My students are again and again and again "shocked", "sad about", "confused 'cuz", "can't believe" and "amazed" that so many bad things happen in so many places so often. In line with Shag's point about the centrality of communication - this is Platonic/Socratic, no? - my liberal students really believe that if people were told about all the bad that followed from the things they do and, therefore, really knew the good then they'd do good things.
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 9:10 PM, Sandy Harris <sandyinchina at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/6/10, shag carpet bomb <shag at cleandraws.com> wrote:
> > hmm. since both kinds of liberals put their faith in method, maybe
> > they should be called "methodological liberals" ha ha. man, if i do
> > say so myself, below would make a good book!
>
> Voltaire's Bastards?
> http://www.johnralstonsaul.com/SUM_Voltaires.html
> http://www.scottlondon.com/reviews/saul.html
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
-- ********************************************************* Alan P. Rudy Dept. Sociology, Anthropology and Social Work Central Michigan University 124 Anspach Hall Mt Pleasant, MI 48858 517-881-6319