... previous
4. Old Left-wing
After civilisation of human individuals became matured enough to preserve the record of their knowledge and wisdom, they started thinking differently and the notion of individualism was born among these human individuals. They started realising that they are able to overwhelm the fear and improve their living standard by developing technology and individuals’ voluntary will under right procedures. They researched and developed the procedures from learning about the objective realities such as resource limitation in the substantial world, the market mechanism, and mathematical and scientific factors. They became also enlightened to know that their social norm and value can be flexibly changed by not sticking to their rigid tradition and loyalty to their human authorities. This enlightenment has enabled them to act and think by means of their own invincible will and mind influenced by neither their authority and superstition nor any others.
Various liberation and revolution in the early modern period originated from this enlightenment movement. These revolting individuals became sceptical about their old common sense basing their old ruling traditional status quo, and then started claiming that they would form and develop their civilisation far better than their traditional status quo. Then, they also started believing that there is an impregnable individual right naturally endowed to all individuals equally, and then started claiming for abolition of any social class.
Under this revolutionary ideal, technically speaking, all individuals must be treated equal as long as the distributable resource is available and these individuals claiming for their right bear responsibility to negotiate with the others. In addition, their freedom of speech, thoughts, and choices is widely permitted as it is their right. Those who believe in this ideal expect that the material and spiritual development is eternally unlimited as long as the power of their imagination prevails. But, many of them also affirm that there is a limitation to provide individuals with their right and require, and it is required to spend sufficient time to increase the resource to offer a higher degree of liberty for individuals. Therefore, individual right and liberty are mandate but highly conditional to provide under the natural restriction.
5. New Left-wing
Meanwhile some of these revolutionaries affirm that right and liberty for all individuals are conditional, the other newly emerging revolutionaries argue that they shall be unconditional. These new radicals explain that their scientific ethical theory enables individuals to acquire their ultimate freedom of living as long as they follow the required ethical code. These revolutionary radicals, collectively called the New Left-wingers in this essay, insist that individuals with their unlimited ethical imagination and aspiration rooted on it may overwhelm the barrier of the objective realities, and eventually control over these objective realities. Moreover, they claim that distribution of the rights and protection of individuals’ life security must unconditionally be a top priority over anything regardless of the disequilibrium condition of the resource distribution.
According to their idea, their logical inference to conceive what has been claimed as the objective reality is a false hypothesis deserving their enemy camps. They also claim that which fundamental principle, equivalent to a mathematical axiom, they refer to is far more important than the logical inference for deriving their desiring outcome. According to this theorem, all the logics are subjective because there is no unified objective measure like a mathematical axiom enabling their logical inference to self-contradict and self-verify itself. Therefore, they “invented” an axiom for ethics like an axiom of mathematics which, they think, leads individuals to preserve their unconditional human right. Then, they express that this invented ethical axiom ought to be enthrone in order to alter the whole world natural and social structure.
However, even though they say their new alternative principle shall be objective but this principle is invented from their mere faith which is equally subjective and irrational as much as the superstition maintained in the Old Right-wing world. The mathematical axiom is merely the mathematical theorem which is used in mathematical procedures and their theoretical application. This only exists, as a rule set by the peer groups, to enable the applied theories based on mathematical modelling to self-verify and self-contradict so that it only affect their validity of theories and hardly directly affects the decision making processes of daily politics and individuals’ personal lifestyle. By contrast, their claiming ethical principle as the axiom of our politics and personal life directly affects decision making processes and daily life choices. The fundamental concern is who and how to determine what the leading universal ethical principle is. The universality of moral is still debatable to judge whether the moral validity measurement is universal and relative. Therefore, even though they claim that their claiming ethical principle is an ultimate objective and universal, it still sounds hypothetical by means of the perspective of majority others who are either not familiar with the study of ethics or sceptical about their logical deduction.
It is also the matter of who control the resource distribution to adjust it to their claiming ethically desired state. It requires a huge degree of controlling both moral and material distribution in order to accomplish their desired state. First of all, it ignores the equitable reward and punishment for individuals to motivate to increase their productivity, discourage from causing civil-disorder, and maintain the stable and productive equilibrium of the distribution. When the justice is determined by the principle rather than the equitable reward and punishment, these peer groups who sound more plausible to these peer groups taking the actual controlling power over the court of judgement. In order to keep the stable and productive distribution and the stable and progressive order, then the positive equitable law is more desired. But, these New Left-wingers deny this aspect to zealously cling to their claiming ethically correct state which is merely a utopian dream world. They believe that, even though their claiming ethic base order may disturb the short term instability and unproductivity, the human individuals’ aspiration of pursing their ethics enables individuals to resist against the temporary harms. Thus, rather than the fairness, these New Left-wingers cling to expecting individuals’ genuine patience and collective responsibility based on altruism i.e. sacrificing individuality for collectively protecting all individuals’ survival and morally well-being.
... continue reading:
