The most liberal you can get is when you also see as part of your perspective this case: the minority of one, just one person. It dillutes identitary things... and I don't mean that any group of people may not have the right to assemble; on the contrary, individuals and groups of individuals have interests and they may pursue them as long as they don't break laws, legitimate and non-discriminatory laws.
I've tried to say that identitary grouping ceases to exist at the individual level. And liberalism opens up that level: the scale of the persona, a unique blend of treats in each one although with commonalities among many individuals. It would be like politics at a quantum level, quantum politics jejeje... with lack of congruency with class or group of interests politics, the equivalent of newtonian/einsteinian politics... two approaches towards how people gravitate towards power, waiting for a theory of everything to make them cohere.
I don’t quite agree. The great founding fathers of liberalism did not start negating the existence and/or the value of the group. That is the point oof this article, actually. We tend to believe what you say, that liberalism starts at the individual and accordingly erases the identitarian grouping. BUt that is just an exaggeration of us. Liberalism was invented precisely to keep identities from being erased.
I said above: "I don't mean that any group of people may not have the right to assemble; on the contrary, individuals and groups of individuals have interests and they may pursue them as long as they don't break laws, legitimate and non-discriminatory laws." I agree on your view of the founding fathers view. Maybe I should have emphasized that a new "theory of everything" in Liberalism, will solve the apparent contradiction according to which identities would erase individuals and viceversa...
and then what I am arguing is that this needs not to be invented with a Liberalism TOE. I am saying that the whole point of liberalism is actually solve that issue. And I am also saying that it solved quite well.
The most liberal you can get is when you also see as part of your perspective this case: the minority of one, just one person. It dillutes identitary things... and I don't mean that any group of people may not have the right to assemble; on the contrary, individuals and groups of individuals have interests and they may pursue them as long as they don't break laws, legitimate and non-discriminatory laws.
I don’t really understand your first point. After the “and I don’t mean” I follow and agree… but what do you mean before?
I've tried to say that identitary grouping ceases to exist at the individual level. And liberalism opens up that level: the scale of the persona, a unique blend of treats in each one although with commonalities among many individuals. It would be like politics at a quantum level, quantum politics jejeje... with lack of congruency with class or group of interests politics, the equivalent of newtonian/einsteinian politics... two approaches towards how people gravitate towards power, waiting for a theory of everything to make them cohere.
I don’t quite agree. The great founding fathers of liberalism did not start negating the existence and/or the value of the group. That is the point oof this article, actually. We tend to believe what you say, that liberalism starts at the individual and accordingly erases the identitarian grouping. BUt that is just an exaggeration of us. Liberalism was invented precisely to keep identities from being erased.
I said above: "I don't mean that any group of people may not have the right to assemble; on the contrary, individuals and groups of individuals have interests and they may pursue them as long as they don't break laws, legitimate and non-discriminatory laws." I agree on your view of the founding fathers view. Maybe I should have emphasized that a new "theory of everything" in Liberalism, will solve the apparent contradiction according to which identities would erase individuals and viceversa...
and then what I am arguing is that this needs not to be invented with a Liberalism TOE. I am saying that the whole point of liberalism is actually solve that issue. And I am also saying that it solved quite well.