Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
Understanding Liberalism: Part I - Post-liberalism, Classical Liberalism, and the Post-War Consensus
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 08. 2024
- Jon Harris, Ben Crenshaw, and Timon Cline discuss Postliberal authors and ideas, as well as the distinction between Classical Liberalism and the Post-War Consensus.
#classicliberalism #liberalism
00:00 Introduction
00:43 The End of the Liberal Era
10:06 Postliberalism
23:19 Christianity and Liberalism
29:06 Different Shades of Liberalism
37:59 Coffee Advertisement
40:25 The Poison Pill Theory
To Support the Podcast:
www.worldviewconversation.com...
Become a Patron
/ worldviewconversation
Follow Jon on Twitter: / jonharris1989
Follow Jon on Facebook:
/ worldviewconversation
Follow Jon on Gab:
gab.com/jonharris1989
Appreciate this interview that forces the listener to put their thinking cap on.
Liberalism has gone from meaning pro-individual liberty in co-operation with neighbors to maintain social cohesion (think Herbert Hoover) to collectivism (the Dimocrat Party from FDR onwards).
Thanks, Jon. I so appreciate this conversation.
Great ad thanks Jon
My kids have all loved Rush Revere!
I find it fascinating how we hear endlessly of human rights, womens rights, lgbt rights, minority rights, but nothing about the rights of the husband...
The husband has no rights under progressivism and it is troubling to see how few evangelical pastors and seminary professors have any degree of a problem with that. Even if he is violently assaulted by his wife utilizing hard or sharp objects, the husband's "right" is to call the police and have them come haul him off to jail after accepting the wife's false account of the situation. We have to recognize that chivalry is counter-Biblical, and it laid the Anglophone world wide open to the predations of feminism.
I've listened to Washer/MacArthur/Piper/Baucham and the main takeaways are: 1 you are a servant leader 2 you cannot enforce your authority over your wife 3 you are to sacrifice your desires and dreams for your wife 4 you cannot make demands of your wife 5 they don't want to talk about the evil of women. To sum up, its go die on a cross for your wife no matter how badly she behaves. @@conceptualclarity
Washer in particular loves to go on, and on, about how the purpose of marriage is to be conformed to the image of Christ. Well guess what, most Christians believe the best way to be sanctified is through suffering, so if I have a miserable marriage that is to my benefit because I will become more holy through my marriage.@@conceptualclarity
@@JonathanSaxon I for one would be more pleased if Piper just went away. His Trump stunt his embrace of Obama and CRT and other things he has done much harm.
I think that no small portion of the responsibility for the apostasy of Andy Stanley probably should go to his chronically rebellious mother
I got notice of the Part 2 in my feed first, but to address this great discussion, my concern is clarity (so that 'conservative' leaning debates don't fall the way of the greater atomization we are seeing). But of course the 10 cent question is "who/what do we rally around"? We cant' even define terms enough to talk turkey. One clarity would be principles vs. strategy vs. tactics separation. I am not sure as conservatives we take history discussions back far enough (maybe in our theology, but maybe not our political and social discussions even if we want to claim biblical informed society).
The dualism is a choice between communism and Christianity.
55:51 I appreciate the note about structural changes. It is one area of conversation which I am highly interested in.
Excellent Joh,
Classical Liberal Christian here, at present. I think the individual has become a bad-y for the wrong reasons and must not be tossed. It is philosophically central, theologically unavoidably central. The over-emphasis on RIGHTS is a GROUP & movement thing, HIDING behind a false individualism.
Woke throws the individual under the bus in the name of common good, GROUP absolutes, beliefs, demands. It is utterly vicious, to lose the individual. The culture/politics then descends into the flip, trivializing treatment of people of communism pretty quickly. The individual is unavoidably a fundamental reality and, imo, need not take from the family & real(non-ideologically made) natural communities. These need to be built in better, and certain modern atomizing forces fought/faced/dealt with.
The individual is not really respected by Liberal culture, by Woke. Rather the meaning & place of the individual has been lost or twisted BECAUSE movements want to escape from the mystery & wonder of the God-given conscious, & the conscience, a reality that can only point to GOD's reality, it's such a non-material strangely real thing. And because they want power to control individuals, society, life-GROUP-mind is the best way, hence it must cancel the individual. Not good.
The dangers of wrong usage of all these ideas is important to discuss, under Woke or something new to come. Better yet, we have to teach good usage and traditional beliefs. People haven't known who they are. That's why its been so easy for Woke to come along and just INSIST this is who you have to be, if you care, if you want to be good...and people, Christians, want that so it becomes a trap.
Questioning and revisiting and exploring the thinkers of our American tradition and restructuring, changing, bettering... Let's keep studying this, talking about it, facing the challenges of the day.
Excellent. I'm accustomed to hearing attacks upon individualism from Catholic leftists like Bergoglio.
I think even Rush was beginning to not believe what he was selling at the end of his life. He was torn by his personal allegiance to the Bush family and the obvious failing of the neocon agenda. In any event, this is a fascinating series. I look forward to the rest of it.
Rush died a Roman Catholic and was, therefore, a semi-pelagian. He did not understand total depravity or the sovereignty of God.
@@ThomasCranmer1959 interesting, I did not realize he was Roman Catholic. I am curious, how did you find out ?
@@jamescook5617 His wife is Roman Catholic. I heard her talking about Rush after he died. She said he was converted before he died.
@@jamescook5617 For the record, I do not believe that Catholics are saved.
Finally, R.R. Reno being recognized. His book was an epiphany for me.
Part of the issue is clarification of enlightenment as Christians. While some good things can come from enlightenment period, to me the "big picture" is that the enlightenment was Wokism 1.0 on the heels of the God-assumed scientific revolution, but like the tower of Babel, wanted material discovery and reason without God (humanism). This means that at best, I cannot be a "classic liberal" as people mean it today. Sort of as discussed here in part 1 to give credit to Ben (namely forgetting God as framing).
Not all 'high trust' societies are such. Some are actually 'high shame' societies showing that even the 'good' we see in other nations, especially in the east, is actually driven by sin.
There's some truth to that, but shame can be a good thing and have postiive effects on societies, churches, families and individuals. I'll take Japan over Haiti any day. The idea that shame is always negative is promoted by Christians heavily influenced by psychology and New Age feel good-ism--Brene Brown stuff. It goes hand-in-hand with hypergrace teachings that only see the law in negative terms.
@@johnp7739 There's more than some truth to it. I'm not discounting the godly use of shame. Paul surely used it. It does have excellent restraining powers of people. My point wasn't to call them high trust societies because that means they're high character (godly morality) societies, which they are not. I have spent time in the East and I've seen this firsthand. It's far different than a high trust community here in the US. High shame societies are not driven by the Law of God written on their hearts. These are largely pagan countries. Communism and its influence increases covetousness and greed, so everyone is looking out for their own selves. This is to the point that if, let's say, everyone knows they put the wrong man away for murder, in Singapore, they literally say, "it's okay. The crime has been paid." Certainly I'd take Japan over Haiti, but I'm under no impression that the hearts of Japanese are less depraved than Haitians.
Teddy Roosevelt was in the vein of Woodrow Wilson and FDR? I have never heard. PLEASE EXPLAIN.
Teddy was a progressive Republican.
Enjoyed this. 👌🏻
I’ve noticed that addressing this topic makes normie American “conservatives” extremely uncomfortable.
I suspect this is because they intuitively know, somewhere deep down inside, that some of the issues we currently face are just baked into the American cake. (i.e., there’s at least some truth to the “poison pill,” if you want to call it that.)
That’s a big blackpill for your average normiecon.
Spoken like a true commie con.
Liberalism has always been about the systemization of grievances.
They play the victimization fallacy over and over.
Is that Oliver Anthony's brother? Lol jk
As someone who went through Nixon and Carter I find your framing limited. And of course it would be.
Nixon's economic views were not capitalistic since he believed Keynesian price controls.
I'll pass on Hobbes
It's a loaded word like capital communist the words get disconnected from reality n meaning as it passes thru minds
"intregalist?" Its integralist.
@joelelliason6843 Hey everyone, we've got an evil Intregalist here trying to intregate us! (messing with you :D)
How do you pronounce "jewelry"? Do you pronounce the "t" in "listen"? How about in "often"?@@JR-rs5qs
o7
Heard someone recently moved to Russia because they still have more traditional values than here in the USA...... Pro traditional family and children.... Anti LGBT and Muslim..... but Can you fully practice Christianity over there In Russia ? Without government interference? Edward Snowden seems to be doing okay over there but I guess he has no other choice?
I have heard that Putin is actually failing to put his foot down on Muslim illegal immigration into the Russian Federation and it is putting Russia at risk of having the same demographic crisis as Western Europe
The only church recognized by the Russian government is Russian Orthodox. No other Christian faith or practice is allowed to evangelize or witness.
Russian Orthodoxy is not Christian. It is a state controlled religion and opposed to biblical and Protestant theology, especially Calvinism.
Guys, we can't include non-Protestants like Charles Haywood in our movement.
Why
@roxanachalifoux856 because they're not Christians. They have a different Gospel and worldview. They are piggybacking the Protestant resurgence because they want to gain power. They hate us and do not consider us brothers. Of course we don't consider them brothers either, but we love them enough to call them to repentance and belief in the Gospel.
America does have a meaningful past as a Christian nation, recognized as such by the Supreme Court, and that is not the approach that was taken in those days. BTW, I'm an entirely convinced low church Protestant
@conceptualclarity our founding was through and through Protestant with toleration of non-Protestants, but our toleration was too great and we started electing pagans disguised as Protestants to office. Obviously what we already tried didn't work and we need to try something else.
Fox n' Sons! Tanzanian Peaberry is where it's at.🤌