It takes time and effort to explain and persuade the majority that it is possible to be liberal and conservative simultaneously.

We’ll need to revise the tired assumption that people automatically become more conservative as they grow old.

Charles Kennedy

The presumption that youth is liberal/progressive and that men become more conservative with age is misleading. It is a result of progressivism, which successfully degrades conservatism by linking it to harmful old/decaying/dead, while progressivism is positive/young/fresh/optimistic.

Such degradation can be seen throughout Western civilization. Contrary to their perception, even those who identify as conservatives disseminate progressivism through their words and deeds.

How come?

Democrats are not liberal by definition

The confusion was explained already in this post, which explains in full detail the topology of various possible positions concerning conservative-progressive and liberal-totalitarian. The topology I proposed a decade ago goes very much against the commonly accepted “fact” that conservatives stand on the opposite side of the spectrum than liberals. One gets a perfect example of what I just said in the USA and the UK. Liberals political parties are de facto marginal in both mentioned countries but also elsewhere around the Western world. Those who are opposing each other are Republican and Democrat extremists reaching the totalitarian edge of the left and right sides on my topology chart. Both are far from liberalism as much as possible. By that same token, they become more and more extremist, anti-liberal, and totalitarian over time.

Example from the USA: Both Democrats and Republicans hate Ayn Rand’s liberal utopia. And as Ayn Rand explained herself, she despised Republicans even more than Democrats. Using my Political Brane Topology, I can easily explain such phenomena. (1)

But as much as Republicans share the same extremism with Democrats, it is the prevailing progressive ideology of today that branded the conservative position as reactionary. Why? Because progressive ideology implanted the “truth” that being conservative equals being anti-liberal. Since Democrats are on the other side of Republicans, Democrats got liberal quality automatically only by being Democrats. In reality, they got this quality entirely unwarranted.

For this reason, most media and intellectuals, at least in the Western world, support Democrats. These same individuals who misplace liberal values for democratic values feel baffled whenever Democrats pursue the same totalitarian values as Republicans. Such confusion in left/progressive heads also gives much space to universalistic One World ideology. In the previous post, I explained why such ideology, with its multinational institutions, leads to communism or fascism. 

Digression about democracy

By the way, the Founding Fathers (USA) did not understand democracy as substantial for a state they had been looking for, but as liberal values. It was only in the 20th century, with the rise of extremism both on the Democrat and Republican sides, that liberal values were forgotten and the mantra of democracy and, even worse, the “export of democracy” was being reinforced day by day by all presidents that ran the USA to this day.

Being liberal conservative

Homonism is a favorable utopia that positions itself as liberal and conservative simultaneously.

Since we have already explained that an extremely liberal position is theoretically impossible, we know that it is a vision to devise a life that would make as low an amplitude around the liberal line as possible but still an amplitude with necessary extremes. Fortunately, a power law is in play in this case, explaining why the most productive height of a magnitude lies quite close to the straight liberal/death line. So, science taught us that you should not go far from the low entropy line of the liberal straight line to achieve the highest possible output. And we know that with larger amplitudes, we increase entropy and come closer and closer to chaos, which is a result of any totalitarian regime, as we have experienced so many times.

Why conservative?

It is funny that the European Union suddenly got excited about the circular economy. I have already explained the scam, but I want to stress that the circular economy is inscribed into all sustainable systems, including the economy, and circularity is an integral part of conservatism. While progressives see life progression as a straight-up line aiming at a final goal outside this line somewhere in a far distance (utopia), conservatives understand life as a constant circulation around some core values aiming at this moment and this point in life only.

Unfortunately for pervasive progressivists, there “certain” Charles Darwin explained evolution in an utmost conservative fashion. Evolution as a product of random mutation aims at no “goal” and certainly does not follow any progressive plan or particular end state. That is why Darwinism is so opposed to any religion. That is also why Buddhism and Hinduism are not progressive religions and have nothing against Darwinism, and that is why those intellectuals are living in tremendous cognitive dissonance, being Darwinists and progressivists at the same time.

Being a scientist equals being conservative.

This is the punchline of this post. You don’t have to age to become conservative. There is a much faster path to homonism: take science seriously and try to understand all implications for life that arise from various sciences. Those sciences I had an opportunity to come closer to all share circular, conservative, network-based, random, non-intentional, anti-progressivist explanations of life, matter, and the cosmos. Neuroscience with network-based brains and with no center (no utopia); complexity theory with its principles of self-organization; evolutionary theory with an implicit fact that viruses, bacteria, plants, or zebras are as much evolved and as developed as humans (if not more); quantum mechanics that opens the possibility to explain events that were so far “explained” only through religion and religious utopia; all these sciences are thoroughly conservative.

How do you become a liberal conservative?

While I have already explained how to become conservative (and I should add only philosophy as a holistic view on science to what I said previously), it seems that it is much harder to find a productive liberal position/amplitude.

True!

It is hard to restrain and be active at the same time. Keeping and developing your identity (distance from others) and being tolerant is hard. It is hard to focus on this moment in time and your interests while being social and compassionate at the same time. It is hard to say NO to all sleazy “humanitarian” prophets preaching compassion and global harmony (who can be against that?), but leading to the worst type of totalitarian submission of the individual to a brave new world.

But it is possible. It has one word that I can not pronounce here, but I can call it homonism. It rests on the equilibrium of wisdom, power, and beauty.

—

(1) Three weeks before Trump takes over his second US presidency, the question of whether he will disprove me, and for that matter also Ayn Rand, stays open. We can understand from the words of Robert F. Kennedy and Elon Musk that the new Trump government might be even more liberal than the one of Ronald Reagan. This post is going to be reevaluated again in 2029. We shall see then if their deeds supported their words.