Tuesday, May 09, 2006

Liberal Conservative G-d

There is no such thing as exclusive liberalism or conservativism; both are after the same thing – truth. However, each defines truth in a relatively different way, but we can tell that they share in certain essentials when we look at where the extreme polar opposites of each ideology fall on the political spectrum; it is the far left and right extremists that begin to see eye-to-eye on certain issues. For example, an extremist liberal and conservative might both ferociously oppose abortion on grounds that it is murder; the liberal has his secular humanist paradigm and the conservative has his religious sacredness paradigm, but they both agree with absolute conviction that abortion is murder. As they move further down the ends of the political spectrum they believe more strongly that abortion is murder and are less flexible to viewpoints that deem it acceptable. In that, they begin to agree with each other almost completely; that abortion is absolutely intolerable. As they move away from the edges and towards the center, they begin to disagree more and more, until they start to near the center, where they begin to reach neutrality and even apathy. Why does the unseemly occur? Why do people begin to agree on fundamental issues the more they move towards the fringes of the political spectrum and to disagree the more centrist they become? The answer must be that the closer to the center one is, the more he is subject to pulls from both sides, i.e., the more he is influenced by truths upon which each side insists. This leaves him in a state of confusion or flux, moving back and forth around the center area and teetering between both sides of the spectrum and yet feeling pulled further to one edge or the other. The center extremity seems to be the location on the spectrum in which relativism of all types occur – the place where no truth and all confusion exist – it is “tohu vavohu,” chaos. The center extremity is not marked by any specific paradigm, there is nothing, other than a “happy medium,” for which the perfect center can attest, and the “happy medium” usually is marked by a lack of a stance rather than a stance; it is a netherworld of ideology. The closer to the edges that a person gets, the stronger he feels that neutrality and apathy are damaging and the more he feels that absolute truth is a must for society.

But even though a fringe lefty and a fringe righty stand face-to-face at opposite ends of the spectrum (in which the spectrum curves around like a ring and meets, with a space in the middle), they are still on opposite ends of the spectrum; they each stand for entirely different paradigms. How can they possibly agree on an issue? For example, both the fringe liberal and conservative feel with absolute conviction that abortion is murder, but one feels it on the grounds of a rational secular humanism and the other feels it on the grounds of a sacredness essential to G-d; are these not two opposing and contradictory viewpoints? No they are not; the fringe liberal has a solid and unwavering conceptualization of human value and dignity, not to mention a powerful conscious based on these notions, while the fringe conservative has a solid and unwavering conceptualization of the holy and sacred, not to mention also a powerful conscious based on these notions. It is at this point on the spectrum where a truth can be fostered, the type of truth that yields genuine peace, because an unwavering notion of human value and dignity and an unwavering notion of the holy and the sacred are the same thing! The secular humanism of the left reaches so far into the extremities that on its own it idolizes the human being to the status of G-d; it has the notion of human dignity down pat, but it is G-dless and therefore it cannot last and becomes what it detests. The sacred religiosity of the right too reaches so far into the extremities of the right that it stamps out all that is beautiful and harmonious about the sacred and becomes rigid and frozen; it removes the human element from the equation almost entirely – it can last, but only by force. In this spot is where the overt love of the human and his worth meets the overt love of the holy and its worth, and it is here, and only here, where the human being becomes holy. This is “G-d’s Spot,” this is where G-d intends for humanity to reside, and this is the intent of each of the commandments; at once they establish dignity towards human beings (and animals) and to the consciousness of the Divine, which is our G-d. That is why you cannot have a secular form of the Divine commandments and it is why you cannot have a form of religious piety divorced from the human condition. This is the Equilibrium of existence, which is the Torah, which is peace.

No comments: