The political spectrum explained by a Classical Liberal | Bruce Pardy

We are polarized between two political tribes, perhaps like never before: left vs right, liberal vs conservative, democrat vs republican. In ongoing culture wars, progressives are ascendant and conservatives fight to recover lost ground. But do these opposing camps have more in common than they care to admit? And is there a political philosophy that sees the world through a completely different lens?

To help us answer these questions, we're joined by Bruce Pardy, a professor of law and executive director of Rights Probe, a law and liberty think tank. He is a classically liberal legal academic who believes in equal treatment under the law, negative rights, private property, limited government, and the separation of powers, which are foundational to the Western legal tradition. He is a critic of legal progressivism, social justice, and the discretionary managerial state, and has written extensively on a range of pressing legal subjects that are at the forefront of the culture war inside the law.

Bruce has taught at law schools in Canada, the United States, and New Zealand, and has also served as a tribunal adjudicator and mediator. A prolific writer and figure in the public arena, he has worked with leading liberty-oriented think tanks in Canada, including the Fraser Institute and the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, and has published and commented widely in traditional and online media. He spearheaded resistance to and ultimate repeal of the Law Society of Ontario’s statement of principles policy that required Ontario lawyers to attest to their ideological purity to maintain their licence to practice. He is also one of the co-creators of the Free North Declaration, a public petition and movement to protect civil liberties from irrationality and overreach.

We began our discussion by highlighting the differences and similarities in prevailing ideologies, and how:

Bruce: “The political philosophies can be judged as much by what they do when they are in power as by what they say when they are not in power.”

Bruce Pardy highlights the differences between collectivism and individualism, what makes classical liberalism different. He also explains the political horseshoe theory in this short excerpt from the full conversation (linked in endcard).

[mrmikemrmike]

I'd recommend the work of author Anthony C. Sutton on the false narrative regarding the Left-Right paradigm. This explanation is a good start prompting folks to open up their minds.

[Smithistory]

The only POLITICAL value the classical liberal supports is individual liberty. The classical liberal recognizes that civil society exists as something distinct from the state and so classical liberal support other ethics and values, but unlike the other groups do not seek to have those ethics and values enforced by the state.

[Anthony-cnll]

Individualism is also a major problem for the United States because we lack direction and end up making net zero societal progression. The separation of powers is one such thing that plays a role in this. Unless there’s a governmental trifecta, there’s no progress. Since the United States has a stinted political spectrum from the Cold War, this ultimately means that we slowly march toward a more right-wing Capitalist society with the occasional lukewarm liberal savior to pacify the masses. We appear to escape the matrix but, in reality, the escape itself was manufactured by the matrix.

[canterter]

Who needs the horseshoe theory when you have Anti-centrist practice?

[mrmikemrmike]

Collectivism and Communalism are two different things though there are shared traits between the two.

[Sufi_Alchemy]

Partly agree but oversimplified. Anarchists are in the individual space, have historically allied with communists.

[rdsmith]

The techniques for doing this are Nudging, Grooming, ... and it all depends on Systematically Distorted Communication.. Habermas

[marcusdavenport]

This is false. The horseshoe fallacy is not an accurate description