Individualism

The foundation of conservative political philosophy is the idea of individualism. Simply put, individualism favors the freedom individuals over collective or state control. Individualism says that the rights and freedoms of the individual are more important than the goals of the collective. The rights of the individual cannot be sacrificed for the sake of the collective.

When I hear others talk about individualism, I often feel that the philosophy is misunderstood. In fact, I myself used to be confused about this core conservative idea. Many seem to confuse individualism with isolationism. They believe that individualists are sad and lonely people, who are anti-community. However, individualists are not anti-community. A community is of great benefit to all the individuals involved. Individualism only means that your rights are not to be violated by the community or by another individual.

All Equal

The greatest summation of the concept of individualism can be found in the Declaration of Independence. “We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal...”. Before you point out that this excludes women, I will point out that in this case “men” is supposed to be gender-neutral here. All humans are equal. Every gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion; criminals and upstanding citizens; every age, including the unborn.

We are equal in many ways. First off, we are all equal in essence. Philosophers debate the essential nature of humanity, but we all intuitively know what makes a human. Second, we are equal in rights. The aforementioned statement of the Declaration goes on to list just a few of our basic rights to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”. I will describe more about what rights are in the next post.

We all have equal rights, and my rights do not take precedence over your rights. If you violate my rights, you have opened yourself up for reciprocation. Finally, because we all have equal rights, we are all equal before the law. That means, in court, I should have the same shot at justice as a rich person or a person of a different ethnicity.

Collectivism

Individualism stands opposed to the philosophy of collectivism. Collectivism says that the goals of the collective are more important that the rights of the individual. Collectivism has led to many atrocities throughout human history. Consider slavery, and how the slaves right to liberty was violated by the collective of slavery supporters, who felt the institution was necessary for their economy.

The Nazis also declared that whole groups of people didn't possess the right to life. Racism is always a form of collectivism, because it sees people in terms of groups (“races”), instead of as individuals. Finally, communism denies citizens the right to private property, in the name of benefiting the collective.

Illustration: Civil War

One of the greatest illustrations of individualism versus collectivism can be found in Captain America: Civil War. The story is written to highlight the differences between the two philosophies. Captain America beautifully embodies individualism. He believes signing the Sokovia Accords is a violation of his right to follow his conscience. He is not a lone-wolf isolationist, but instead teams up with other heroes (Team Cap) who believe as he does.

Team Iron-Man is very much on-the-nose with spelling out how evil collectivism is. Even Black Widow says at one point [paraphrased] “How we stay together is not as important as the fact that we stay together.” Think about the implications of that statement. Team Iron-Man must bully others into getting their way, all in the name of “safety”. In the end, Cap says that the core of what he believes in is individuals... which is the essence of individualism, conservatism, and America.

6 Essentials of Conservative-liberalism

There are six concepts that I feel are essential to conservatism. These aren't just “my six conservative principles”, instead these are the six principles that I propose are essential to conservatism. I have written them in a way that builds one on top of the other. Let me know if you can see how they are all connected.

Individualism

Individualism is the idea that all humans are equal. We are equal in essence, and therefore equal in rights, and therefore equal before the law. We are all one people, not to be divided by religion, political party, ethnicity, gender, or any such thing. Yet, each of us is a unique individual. We each have similarities and differences that we can find with each human being on Earth.

Negative rights

Negative rights are rights that only require inaction on the part of others. Your right to life, requires that others NOT kill you. Your right to free speech requires that others NOT stop you from talking (although you can't force them to listen, either). Negative rights boils down to your right to be left alone. This is in stark contrast with positive rights, which are entitlements to free stuff. Negative rights must be protected in order to maintain civilization, and those who violate negative rights must be punished (usually by having their rights proportionally violated).

Personal virtue and liberty

When we protect everyone's negative rights, we create a society with the purest form of liberty, but in order to maintain this pure liberty, we must have virtue, which can be defined as moral excellence. Someone who pursues moral excellence (virtue) can be expected to give liberty to his fellow-man. In fact liberty can be considered the most basic form of virtue.

He can also be expected to pursue the highest good for himself and others. He will seek mutually-beneficial trades, that will lift up both himself and his fellow-man. He will give to the poor, without government coercion. He will stay away from substances and activities which harm himself and those around him.

A perfectly moral population would need no government, but no one is perfectly moral. However, the more moral a population, the smaller government that they will require. This concept is the often unspoken core of conservatism. If we want greater liberty, we need to promote the highest virtue, in the greatest number of people. Virtue cannot be brought by force, from the top down, except for severely punishing those who violate negative rights. Instead virtue must be taught from the ground up.

Limited government

The government is an institution, set up by the people, to protect the negative rights of their citizens. The job of the government is to recognize different rights, create laws to protect those rights, and punish those who break the law. In America, we have a contract with our government called the Constitution. Our government promises to protect certain negative rights, and we promise not to overthrow them. At least that's supposed to be the idea.

Decentralization

Our Constitution limits the government's power, and the Tenth Amendment delegates all other powers, not mentioned, to the states or to the people. This protects us from centralizing power, which leads to more micro-managing from bureaucrats in the capitol. An effective government delegates power as much as possible. The federal government delegates power to the states, states to counties, cities, and towns, and from there to private institutions, families, and individuals.

Free enterprise

Free enterprise is based off of two negative rights: your right to your own property and your right to control how you use your property. When these rights are truly carried out, we create a free enterprise, and wealth is generated. Not money, but wealth. Wealth is generated primarily when there is a mutually-beneficial exchange. When both parties in a trade win, they walk away wealthier than they were before. This doesn't eliminate poverty, as we can never eliminate poverty. However, it can alleviate the severity of poverty.

So What Do You Think?

Please share this post if you liked it. Also, tell me what you think. Tweet at me @frank_perseo or comment on the Frank Talks Facebook page. Did I miss any essential concepts in conservatism? Do you disagree with any of the ones I presented? If so, please tell me why. I am curious to know.

The Political Spectrum – Politics 101

What does it mean to be a conservative? What does it mean to be a liberal? What do the left and the right on the political spectrum represent? What about the up and down (authoritarian to libertarian)? Where am I on the political spectrum? These were all questions that I was asking only 4 years ago.

Don't get me wrong, I was always interested in politics. Mostly due to my religious background, my disregard for controversy, and my desire to make a difference in the world. However, before 4 years ago, I was clueless when it came to understanding political philosophy.

I often refer to a "political awakening" that occurred four years ago (the summer before I left for Bible college). It started when I was talking to a mentor of mine, who is very politically involved, and I decided to ask him about the political spectrum. The conversation cleared up so many questions that today I call it my "Politics 101".

Spectrum of Government Control

If you google "political spectrum", there are many different versions out there. Everyone has their own opinion, and I have mine. This one, simply makes the most sense. The political spectrum that I use is one axis which measures the amount of government control. On the far left, there is totalitarianism, which is where the government controls virtually everything it can. On the far right, is not crazy Republicans like Rush Limbaugh, but instead those who believe there should be no government: anarchists.

In fact, this spectrum can be boiled down to five major positions: (left to right) totalitarianism, progressivism, liberalism, libertarianism, and anarchy. Totalitarianism is about virtually total government control. Progressivism is about progressing towards more government control. Libertarianism (for the purpose of this post) is about progressing towards less government control and presence (anarchy). Liberalism is about having a proper amount of government and personal freedom.

For some reason, virtually every spectrum that I found puts fascism on the far-right. However, if we are measuring the amount of control the government has, fascism is on the far-left, as a form of totalitarianism like communism. Fascism, communism, and socialism differ in style, but at their core they all rely heavily on government regulation.

Slippery Slope

I like to say that "Progressivism is a slippery slope to totalitarianism, and libertarianism is a slippery slope to anarchy." Not only that, but anarchy is a slippery slope to tyranny, which loops us right back to totalitarianism. Anarchy (having no government) could only work if everyone behaved and and no one violated their neighbors rights.

This notion goes against all of human experience (not to mention my Christian views of the nature of mankind). We know that the strong, if left unchecked, will terrorize the weak.

Liberalism

Liberalism is founded on the idea of individualism: the idea that all people are created equal. We may not all be equal in circumstances, but we are all equal in essence, before the Law. We all have the right to be left alone. For instance, three of your basic rights include the right to life (to not be killed), to liberty (to not be enslaved), and property (to not be robbed). In order to maintain these rights, we must have justice, and we must have an institution to facilitate justice.

Liberalism is about giving the people as much personal liberty as possible, without violating the rights of others. In order to do that, we must have a government that is properly limited. In America, our founders set up a contract between the people and the government, called the Constitution, to ensure both justice and liberty.

Conservatism

Here in America, those who we call "conservatives" are about conserving the philosophy of liberalism, through a strict (conservative) interpretation of the Constitution. These conservatives, also called conservative-liberals, are interested in conserving the balance of power, to give the people maximum liberty to pursue happiness.

Some of you may be shocked. Some of you probably disagree with what I am saying. Conservatives are not about freedom. "Conservatives are not liberal." We must remember that not everyone who calls himself a conservative is one. In my next blog, I want to spend some time writing about true conservative philosophy. Conservatism is about having the freedom to do what you want, so long as you don't infringe on anyone's basic rights.

So What Do You Think?

Please share this post if you liked it. Also, tell me what you think. Tweet at me @frank_perseo or comment on the Frank Talks Facebook page. Where do you line up on this spectrum? Do you think that I am wrong to characterize conservatives as the true liberals. 

Am I a Libertarian?

Well, that depends on how you define "libertarian". I can already hear the collective groan among my audience. Especially those who know me personally, and my propensity to be a word-nerd. Nonetheless, it truly does depend on how you define the word. I want to give some of my thoughts on libertarianism.

On this blog, I have defended the philosophy of conservatism. I like what conservative icon Ronald Reagan said of libertarianism "I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism". The cental concept of libertarianism is liberty: hence the name. Liberty is the freedom to do what you want, so long as you don't infringe on the rights of others. I love liberty, and I believe that we need to conserve certain principles in order to maintain our liberty.

Libertarians are a broad and diverse group. They have a wide array of views on different issues, because they believe in freedom of thought. Because of their diversity, it is so difficult to find a group on unifying beliefs among them. Should abortion be legal? Should we have a police force? What about a justice system? What about a military? Should we have our own party, or should we join with the two major parties? I was inspired to write this blog by this video, which talks about 6 different kinds of libertarians.

Personally, I simplify them down to two categories: modern and classical libertarians. I do this for simplicity's sake, and it helps me to better determine if a self-proclaimed libertarian is an ally. For me there are two factors which separate the two groups. Firstly, do you believe that there is a legitimate function of the institution of government? Second, do you believe that personal virtue is important among citizens to maintain liberty?

If you answer yes to both questions, I would classify you as more of a classical libertarian, and an ally. If you answer no to both question, you are a mordern libertarian, and we have some serious disagreements. (This does not necessarily mean that we can't be allies.)

Our founders are what I would consider classical libertarians. They believed that in order to maintain liberty, you need an appointed institution to dispense justice. Many of them were Christians, and believed that this institution was ordained by God, but could be kept in check by people.

They wrote the Constitution as a contract to limit the government, thereby maximizing the freedom of the citizens. Your freedom only ceases at the rights of others. Personally, I think that the idea of this contract is that if they keep up their end of the bargain, we the people will keep our end. If they break the contract, then we should rise up and replace them.

Our founders also believed in personal virtue, and self-sacrifice. Sometimes we give up the things that we want right now, in order to better ourselves and the community. Self-interest is fine, but self-sacrifice is also noble. It brings about human flourishing (the pursuit of happiness). Virtue is about caring for others. Why would you care whether or not you violate someone else's rights, if you don't care about them? Or if you don't fear the consequences. If everyone was virtuous, if they cared about their fellow-man, we wouldn't need to worry about them violating each other's rights.

It is in the best interest of liberty, and small government, to more people who are as virtuous as possible.

In Summary

Libertarians are those who believe in liberty. Some believe that this is best acheived by throwing off all government, and no longer imposing any standard of virtue. I believe that teaching citizens to be as virtuous as possible* and by maintaining and small and limited government, we can have the purest form of liberty anywhere in the world.

This limited government is given to us in the Constitution. We must maintain a conservative interpretation of the government, to keep those in power from overstepping their bounds. This is why I am a conservative, and I believe conservatism is best for libertarianism.

“If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals — if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.”― Ronald Reagan

*Personally I advocate Christianity and Christian ethics as the most virtuous way to live.

Be the Change

"Be the change that you want to see in the world." That's my senior-year advice, to all the upcoming freshmen, and to anyone reading this. It's the advice that sent me on a journey, leading me to start this blog. I started this blog to share my personal thoughts on my faith, my political views, and on living a well-rounded life. It was this advice that sparked my interest in well-roundedness and consequently into politics.

I knew that if I wanted to bring real and positive change, I need to be informed on the issues and to exercise my right to vote! For the past four years I have immersed myself in learning about politics. For the past year, I have followed the presidential election with great anticipation.

More Than Politics

I have informed myself on what the candidates believe. I have educated my friends and encouraged them to vote. I have made my opinions known. I voted. I have exercised my free speech and my right to vote. All of this is futile if that is all I do.

Even if my dream candidate is nominated and elected, that will not fix the problem with our country. It would only begin to fix our problem. It is the Left that teaches our problems are in our circumstances. We need more laws, we need a better President, we need to make this a safer place. On the other hand, the Right is founded on the philosophy of individualism. The idea that the individual has the ability to make life good for himself, if he wants to.

Many of the issues that the Left and Right talk about are far to complex to pass a law, or some executive order, and simply fix. Americans, throughout history have never really trusted the government to do stuff. We won't get old waiting for bureaucrats to decide to do something. We are do-it-yourself people. We start a business or non-profit, and get that problem fixed, if at all possible.

Be A Better Person

No man is an island. Nothing happens in a vacuum. If you want to see a better world, first you must seek to be a better person. Then, when you discover what works, you should encourage others to do the same.

So many issues will not be solved by passing another law, or by some bureaucratic action. Poverty, obesity, violence, education, abortion, joblessness and many more issues could be solved by individuals refusing to accept their situation. By individuals changing their circumstances, instead of letting the circumstances change them. You cannot change circumstances on a global scale, but you can change circumstances within your reach.

Well-Rounded Life

As I have written in previous blogs, I am a firm believer in six arenas of the human experience. We all have them, and we can all grow in each of them. They are spiritual*, intellectual, physical, social, occupational*, and financial.

*(I want to take a minute to explain spiritual and occupational, to clarify my meaning. The spiritual arena is not just for those who believe in the supernatural. The spiritual arena includes your worldview philosophy, your moral philosophy, and your moral practices. For instance, an atheist might have an empirical/naturalist philosophy, and they may live by a utilitarian ethical system. Occupation is about what you do with your time: your job, volunteer work, recreation, or learning new skills.)

The spiritual aspect is the most import, which is why I always list it first. Our founders knew that this Republic was for a moral people: a people that would seek the best for one another. Only a moral people will care to respect the rights of others. An immoral people will simply want their own way, which leads to tyranny.

It is important for us all to grow intellectually. Not simply to receive a diploma, but to be readers, researchers, critical thinkers, and to love the Truth. American obesity will not be solved by government programs, but instead by individuals being motivated to improve their health, and motivating their friends to do the same.

As far as the social, occupational, and financial arenas: there are an countless ways in which these can impact political issues. You only need a bit of imagination to see how these areas can impact society. The social arena is the one that inspired this whole post. I was thinking about how it takes a village to raise a kid. This goes back to the moral arena. Kids are taught morals, not from textbooks, but from relationships. Particularly from their parents. However, I have never seen a well adjusted kid who didn't have mentors outside of their parents. It takes a village to raise a kid, which requires parents to have a good social circle.

I Could Go On

I literally could go on for several pages, on this topic, but I hope that I have demonstrated my point and inspired you. Don't wait for some government official to change the world. Be a well-rounded person. Be the person that you think everyone should be. Be the best version of yourself. Then inspire others to do the same. If we all did that... we could change the world.

Fame

I'm sure we've all dreamed of being famous. We all would love to be universally loved and respected. However, some of us may have decided in the end that we value other things more than popularity (like privacy or sanity). Nonetheless, if you are in any kind of business, you are most likely looking for a way to boost the recognition of your product/brand/business.

Wouldn't you love your brand to be globally recognized? Whether you are a blogger, a YouTuber, an entrepreneur, or you aspire to be a Hollywood celebrity. Too bad we can't all be world famous like Coca-Cola or Brad Pitt. ... Or can we?

Is the Hall of Fame Getting Crowded?

I mean, is it just me, or are there more celebrities in the world these days? It seems like all the time there are more and more people that I am supposed to be able to recognize. When I am watching a movie or TV show, I will often google the actors and peruse through their filmographies. I'm not obsessed, I don't read tabloids, but I like to know a bit about these guys and their work. I find it interesting, and I know I'm not alone in this, because our culture is obsessed with celebrities.

In my time studying the who's who in Hollywood, I've often wondered something: is the number of celebrities in the world growing? Surely, in ancient history there were very few figures who were world renowned, or even who's reputation spread through multiple nations. I'm sure this changed as the world began to become more connected.

Impact of Technology

Telegraphs, radio, movies, and television and many other inventions made it possible for people to become world famous. Not only that, but they allowed more and more people to achieve that world-fame. The connectivity that these technologies provided, allowed us to share our cultures more easily with other countries. However, they still limit recognition to the elite few.

Then the Internet comes along and completely changes the game. Internet innovations allow regular people to connect with an audience, and to grow that audience. The internet even created a new class of fame: internet-famous. These people are known by thousands and millions of people, but are not quite household names. Internet-fame is to recognition, what the middle-class is to economic status.

How Wealth is like Fame

Wealth is not a single pie which needs to be divided evenly among all the people. A better analogy for wealth would come from agriculture: seeds and crops, which have the ability to multiply. Through hard work, innovation and trade, we can create new wealth. In two previous blogs, I have argued for this concept. Both of these blog posts were inspired by this video, which explains the concept a little more fully than I do.

Recognition is capital in the same way the money is. I think anyone would agree that recognition is always an asset for your brand. Much like wealth, recognition is a resource with very little limits. Not every brand or personality can achieve the status of being a house-hold name. However, there are two factors which are increasing: the number of people in the world, and connectivity through the Internet.

Our culture treats wealth and fame like they are inherently evil things, like those who pursue them must be selling out. I would contend that neither is inherently evil, it all depends on what you do with your money or recognition. You can use wealth to donate to charity, give people jobs, or buy a bunch of equipment and fight crime as the Batman. Fame can also be used for good. You can use recognition (or today, a following) to bring light to issues, events and even to good artwork.

How to Grow Your Recognition

Do you remember the end of the Muppet Movie, where Kermit and the Muppets finally make it to Hollywood, find a producer, and say to him "We'd like the rich and famous contract please." Yeah, I'd like that contract too. No seriously. Where can I find this contract? I would like to know. Unfortunately, it doesn't work like that.

You grow your audience the same way that you grow your wealth: through hard work, innovation and trade. You work hard and get creative to make content that people will enjoy. Innovations in internet advertising allow us to target specific audiences. While free-trade happens all through the advertising process, one of the greatest ways to expand your reach is through collaboration.

Collaborating with other creators is like free-trade: you can both grow your reach, and walk away with more followers. You want to collaborate with creators who make content similar to your own. We've all seen stars on YouTube who have grown this way. When YouTube stars first started collaborating, that's when the community (and the individual stars) really started to take off. By continually creating more (and better) content, you can continue to grow your reach.

As your recognition grows, you can collect bigger profits. As you collect bigger profits, you can hire more people... and become Batman.

So that's why I'm not afraid to say that I want to be rich and famous. Please share this post if you liked it. I just really want to become Batman. Also, tell me what you think. Tweet at me @frank_perseo or comment on the Frank Talks facebook page. 

Cut the Cable

I was four years old, maybe younger. My sister and I woke up early one day to watch the relatively new show called Barney and Friends. There may have been a bowl of cereal in my hands as I watched the purple dinosaur prance around the screen. Then, at a point where I remember my young curiosity being peaked, the show cut off. I can still feel the confusion and panic that I felt in that moment. I was beginning to meltdown, but luckily my big sister knew what to do.

She ran to our parents' room, and I followed her to ask what had happened. My mom was only half-awoken from her sleep when she muttered words that my little mind couldn't possibly understand at that age: "I cancelled our cable." What does that mean? Does that mean I will never know what Barney was about to say? (I still, to this day, do not know.) What were we going to do with our morning? Life as we know it had come to an end.

My Parents are Kinda Hipsters

My parents cancelled their cable... before it was cool. My understanding is that this was all my mom's decision. She just one day decided that it wasn't worth the money. A few years ago, I read an article saying that many families have started doing the same. I like to think of my mom as the ultimate trend setter.

I grew up on only a limited number of movies, and a lot of playing outside. At this point I usually get the gawking looks, the disbelief. I used to think that people were just teasing, but turns out that they actually can't believe I grew up without TV (and there are a lot of movies I still haven't seen). It shocks me that people can't fathom life without a television.

How did I turn out?

I was still hooked, however. Whenever we were out, if the television was on, my face was glued to it. I think the forbidden-ness of it was what attracted me to it. This may also be what has attracted me to the film industry. Since I was at least 10, I have said that I wanted to be a director. Really, I wanted to be a man with many hats (like my hero, Ben Franklin), but director (or something in film) has always been one of those hats.

Nine years ago (2007) was when we first got WiFi in our house. That same summer I discovered a site called YouTube, and I immediately began to make up for lost time. Over time I found so many shows that I could watch online, with no extra charge to my parents. Many people have discovered this phenomenon, which is probably why there exists this trend of people cancelling their cable.

My question: why hasn't everyone joined this movement? I promise, I won't look down my nose at those who choose to keep cable. My main purpose here is to talk about the benefits of internet-based media, but I will also point out some benefits of cancelling cable as well.

Save money

The first benefit of cancelling your cable is the most obvious: the money you save. This was important to my parents when they cancelled. If you can afford the time and the money to keep your cable, feel free to. However, if you are struggling with finances, I would strongly recommend cancelling. Think of all the money you will free up. Fortunately, with this point I am most likely preaching to the choir.

FOMO- Fear of Missing Out

I would suspect that this is a key reason that people don't want to cancel, they fear being out of the loop with all the cool shows going on. Let me tell you, I've lived my whole life out of the TV loop. Trust me, it's not that bad. I think, deep down inside, it's been the one thing that has inspired me to be unique. I'm not interested in following the trends, I am interested in setting them.

More options

I don't know about all of my readers, but I grew up in a very religious background. I always hear religious people complain about how evil the entertainment media has become. They complain about how Hollywood keeps pushing an agenda. My grand-pop (who was in no way religious) also used to lament that televisions was "nothing but a vast wasteland". We can debate that presumption in the comments, but so many people who believe this still have their cable.

Today you can seek out and find media that is more agreeable to you. Now I think that you shouldn't only consume media that you agree with. I believe that the mind is sharpened by being exposed to difficult problems. However, you can stop banging your head against the wall. Lift up your eyes. Look around you. There are more options to choose from.

Support small businesses

I hear about the importance of this all the time, from both the left, the right and the undecided. Well, maybe we all can start practicing what we preach. I am not saying that you absolutely must cancel your cable, or that you can never go see another Hollywood film again. I am saying to diversify. I personally prefer independent media to mainstream media.

When you support independent media with your money, you are helping small businesses grow. You are giving young artist/entrepreneurs a shot at living on their dream. I am not quite "anti-corporation" but there are 6 corporations which run all the mainstream media in America. I am not saying "down with the man", but I would rather see the shrinking of the mainstream media, and the growth of independent media.

So, tell me what you think. Tweet at me @frank_perseo or comment on the Frank Talks Facebook page. Do you still have your cable? Do you consume a lot of independently produced media? If so, what are some of your favorite sources? Has this blog given you something to think about? I am curious to hear your thoughts. Thanks for reading!