Are Liberals Becoming more Illiberal?
Are we causing more harm in the process of spreading awareness for what we think is right?
BY: PAYAL DASS
Photo Courtesy of New York Times Magazine
The social climate around us is very tense. From being in the middle of a global pandemic, to racial tension, climate change, and the never-ending political disputes, our world compels us to walk on eggshells around each other. Every topic of discussion is driven by opinions, in which most people feel passionate about. Our generation of students in particular have adopted a mostly liberal mindset as we have developed different opinions from the past on topics like identity politics and equality among all populations.
However, it is these liberal ideals that we seem to relay and spread very strongly, sometimes without a valid reason in doing so. It is the liberal values and ideals we, as a generation, are spreading out to the world. These values usually involve the enforcement of accepting attitudes and identities of people of all kinds––if one fails to do so, we cancel them. Arguably, the main reason as to why we always walk on eggshells around each other is because of cancel culture. One opinion that does not support the general principles of being all-inclusive and ‘open-minded,’ usually has them trending on social media for all the wrong reasons. Cancel culture is known to be a type of ‘punishment’ for not abiding by a certain set of norms: the liberal norms.
But what exactly does liberalism and its values stand for?
lib·er·al·ism
/ˈlib(ə)rəˌlizəm/
noun
willingness to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; openness to new ideas.
a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise.
According to Oxford Languages, the definition of liberalism includes an aspect of accepting behaviour or opinions that are different than our own. So basically, we are all doing injustice to the concept that endorses diversity of all kinds. It only takes us a few seconds to be at someone’s throat just because they do not agree with the standard liberal ideals. We potentially ruin peoples’ lives for having a different opinion. This is nowhere near the acceptance of a diverse opinion liberalism stands for. This is why it seems like there is not a big difference between the liberals and conservatives after all.
Photo Courtesy of Stephan Schmitz
Let Me Explain:
Identity Politics
A main aspect of liberal thought is identity politics. Identity politics is a vague term used to describe the stance in which many values are placed around a particular group of people. For example, values may be placed to appeal to women, people of a particular race, or the LGBTQ+ community. This is also used to enhance behaviours that endorse acceptance of all groups, and to help movements strive for ‘change.’
The novel Cynical Theories by Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay discusses how shallow the values of society are becoming, and how such ideals are not harmful to liberal democracy, but to modern society. It also questions the functions of universities in encouraging such behaviour and why it causes more harm than good (it is an amazing read, I highly recommend).
Photo Courtesy of Amazon
There is one instance in the book where they discuss how the terms of “political correctness” and “identity politics” are used in the same manner, and the extent of which the two concepts rely on each other. They address a conversation with a founder of Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality, Kimberlé Crenshaw, in which she distinguishes the difference in saying “a Black person” and “a person who happens to be Black.” She argues that the liberal position today states that identity has “meanings and consequences” as this concept is “objectively real.”
In short, she emphasizes the effect identity has on someone and what it exactly contributes to the liberal mindset. She explains that being sensitive to how someone identifies themselves is overall respectful to the person you are talking about.
Personally, if someone called me a Brown girl, I wouldn’t care. It wouldn’t make a difference to me as I am indeed, a Brown girl. In my mind, there is nothing offensive about that, however, others may have a different opinion. Some people would be highly offended if someone addressed them by the colour of their skin. I would imagine that identifying someone solely on the basis of skin colour takes away the fact that there is more to a person than just an outward appearance. Being liberal would be respectful of both opinions.
When the argument of identity politics addresses sexuality and incorporates the LGBTQ+ community, things become more complicated. This is where religion and belief systems may not correspond to some particular liberal ideals.
For example, you have a co-worker named Jim. Jim finally reveals that he identifies as a woman and is about to start transitioning as her sex reassignment surgery is this weekend. She requests that everyone begins addressing her by the name of Jenny. You, personally, have no problem with the fact that Jenny is now a transgender woman. You still think that she is a wonderful person. However, your belief system prevents you from addressing her by the name Jenny, and you are still planning on calling her by the name of Jim.
Are you wrong for acting this way?
You are not threatening her life in any way, nor are you repulsed at her identity. You simply do not address her by the name of Jenny because you personally, do not believe in sex change. Does that make someone transphobic? How do we know when we cross the fine line of right from wrong, acceptable and non-acceptable?
Are you going to be punished for following a religion or belief system that doesn’t support transgender people? It’s not like you’re against them in any way. You respect their decision, but do not necessarily agree with it.
Does the label theory have any influence on how we interpret this situation? The labeling theory is a sociological lens that proposes the idea that self-identity is influenced and determined by the terms that define them. Does the fact that we address Jenny as Jim affect her self identity? Knowing what to say without being harassed for it has become increasingly difficult over the past years.
How do we know when to draw the line?
You’re Cancelled
We are so quick to cancel people without fully understanding what has happened from both sides of the dispute.
I am positive that many of you were quick to say that the fact that we do not address Jenny by her preferred name is unacceptable. This is because it is inconsiderate to Jenny as a person and because it is disrespectful to not address someone the way they want to be addressed. Many of us would agree that we would get cancelled because we are not accepting Jenny’s identity.
Some of you, however, may think that we were not entirely wrong. If our belief system has always been against the transgender community, but sicne we cause no harm to them and have nothing against them, there is no need for us to be cancelled.
So what happens when ideals overlap with others?
Like most people, I am not completely left-winged or right-winged. I am somewhere in-between. Like most people and their values, they are not completely for or against something. There are always exceptions.
For example, I am against the death penalty like most Canadians are. The death penalty is not applicable for any crime in this country, but there are times when I really feel that some criminals should be an exception. If someone is guilty, and there is no chance that they are innocent––for the sake of the example––and they are completely sane and have committed the worst-of-the-worst crimes (i.e. Ted Bundy level), I would want them to die. As terrible as that sounds, some people (in my opinion) are monsters and should be punished in the worst ways possible.
Do these exceptions we make for ourselves have any influence on who we cancel? Where do we draw the lines for such exceptions?
I must admit, typing this article is making me nervous because I can guarantee that at least one of the readers will take offence to it, and go on Twitter and have people “do their thing” and potentially ruin my life and my academic career before it starts.
In October of this year, Dr. Verushka Lieutenant-Duval, a professor at the University of Ottawa has been under fire for using the n-word in class. It wasn’t long before Dr. Lieutenant-Duval was receiving hate from everywhere on Twitter after her apology email was leaked and posted for the world to see. This later led to the students demanding reform in the education system as well as demanding the University of Ottawa to take action against her. In fact, all but one student from that particular class had dropped the course as a way to stand up against racism.
Dr. Lieutenant-Duval, however, says that the whole situation has been the centre of outrage due to the lack of context in the way it was being used. She was teaching the class about the queer theory in her Feminist, Gender, and Sexualities class, clarifying that the term ‘Queer’ was an example of ‘subversive resignification.’ To better explain this concept she gave two other examples: the word ‘cripple’ that was resignified by Crip theory and the ‘n-word’ that was resignified by the Black community.
I am not part of the Black community so I do not have a right to comment on when someone can and cannot use the n-word. However, I want to make you consider different scenarios in which this word was used. It could be possible that the word was used as an innocent mistake, and that no drastic measures should be taken unless this event is further looked into.
Many people will argue that even if it was a mistake, the n-word should never cross the mind of someone who is not part of the Black community. But one must also realize the example of music in which the n-word is mentioned. Sometimes, one forgets to not say the n-word in their head if they sing along to all the lyrics. It often takes conscious effort to stop yourself from doing things. Sometimes when singing along to lyrics of a popular song that uses the n-word, not paying attention to the upcoming lyrics, you may just sing along to it, even though you know that you shouldn’t have done it.
Perhaps, this was something similar to what happened during Dr. Lieutenant-Duval’s lecture. I am not trying to convince you of what the verdict of this particular situation should be. I am simply listing the various aspects of how this scenario could be looked at.
Dr. Lieutenant-Duval’s case got even uglier when the standard cancel culture led to the exposure of her home address, phone number and social media in which she has received an endless amount of harassment. What if it was a genuine mistake? Is she receiving this hate for no reason?
I want to encourage everyone to look at multiple angles of such situations before such drastic ‘cancelling’ measures take place. Cancel culture is so toxic that it has the potential to ruin someone’s career for making a genuine mistake, or for simply being uneducated. Instead of destroying someone’s life, have a discussion with them, make them aware of why that was wrong. Give them a second chance because humans are flawed. Some baseless accusations (not saying this particular situation was baseless), have the potential to ruin someone’s hard-earned respect.
I also want to expose the biggest institutions that are responsible for encouraging such toxic behaviours: universities.
Where do Universities Come In?
Universities and education in general are seen to be a left-wing concept. Thus, people have this weird misconception that only conservatives judge the way universities operate because they simply hate higher education. But, liberals tend to overlook the fact that universities put the largest cage around the concept ‘Freedom of Speech,’ the thing that was encouraged the most when they were first created.
Photo Courtesy of Neil V Fernando
University is the place where people of all ages, backgrounds, and experiences go to challenge the way they think. People pay these institutions large sums of money to grow as a person, learn different ways of thinking, and come up with new ways to look at the world. People go to these institutions to get their own ideas torn apart so they can build it stronger for the future. A university is supposed to be intellectually stimulating in which peers challenge each other's thoughts to help critical thinking in each and every one of us.
But, it is the same institution that allows people to report others anonymously for saying something that offends you. There is a difference in reporting someone on the basis where someone is not being treated equally compared to another student. In this case, one should stand up for what is right and fight for a community where everyone is held to the same importance and value.
This system is detrimental, however, to the overall learning climate as people are too scared to share their honest opinions with each other in fear they may get reported. There is now a common belief that if one remains silent, they will never get in trouble, and thus they chose to play it safe, instead of being sorry later.
This is a terrible speech climate.
A university is a place where people are supposed to flourish and help each other reach the one common goal of moving the world forward. Now it has become the place where people only fend for themselves, stepping on each other’s shoes to get ahead, keeping their ideas to themselves in order to get ahead in our small world. A university that was meant to challenge each other’s thoughts and help everyone grow together intellectually, has now become an environment where everyone is terrified to spread their own ideas and opinions because they could get cancelled in doing so.
Liberals have a noble thought of being open-minded to different ideas, but how is it that we have all seemingly become so closed-minded in our own standards? This now seems like liberal views are being delivered through conservatives. No one wants to hear about ideas if they do not fit the liberal standard. If this is the case, can I consider Liberal as the new Conservative?
It is no longer ‘Okay, I get what you’re saying, I don’t agree with it, let me educate you, hope you have a nice life ahead. Goodbye.’ Our culture has now become ‘Accept these liberal morals, or else.’
What would our world be if everyone had agreed with each other? Honestly speaking, it would be boring. People wouldn’t think about things. Philosophy and different outlooks on the world wouldn’t exist. Being a diverse community would be impossible. Everything would be the same.
So let me remind you about what it means to be liberal:
lib·er·al·ism
/ˈlib(ə)rəˌlizəm/
noun
willingness to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; openness to new ideas.
a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise.
As part of the future of this world, I encourage discussion with people who have completely polarizing views from yours. It will help us learn through different lenses. Help us learn about each other. Help us learn about the people that make up the world. Perhaps it will let everyone, of all belief systems, to work together to create a better future.
