Liberals and Conservatives Search for Meaning and Purpose in Different Places

Photo by Ryoji Iwata on Unsplash

In my last blog post, I pointed out the link between political ideology, higher education, and religious values when studying data trends between the states. By diving deeper into these subjects, I think there is a rational explanation for the root cause of these trends.

In the United States, there is a stark contrast between the two competing political ideologies.  Conservatives tend to support the ideals of individualism, which is the philosophy that the individual should be self-reliant and have complete protection against the state – a philosophy that allows for each individual to create their own destiny.  To a right-leaning conservative, the strength of a collective group may still be important, but they feel that a group's strength can only come from having strong individuals.  This is why conservatives believe that individuals should look inward for improvements of one's self in order to be a beacon of good.

In summary, conservatives believe in an incremental, bottom-up approach to societal progress.

Liberals, on the other hand, support the ideals of collectivism.  They believe that empowering the collective is more important than focusing on the individual.  This does not mean that liberals do not care about individuals, but they certainly prioritize the collective over any single individual.  They feel that the strength of an individual is mostly defined by the strength of that individual's collective group.  

When giving credit for the successes of humanity, liberals would rather attribute it to a collective group instead of crediting any individual.  You see evidence of this philosophy when leftist politicians, such as Barrack Obama, say things like "you didn't build that" when referring to the successes of entrepreneurs.  Likewise, when assigning blame for the failures of humanity, they will again look to group identities.  For instance, feminists that have a leftist perspective on the world will claim that we live in a patriarchal society that allows men to oppress women.  Instead of putting blame to only sexist individuals, leftist feminists feel that there is a widespread cultural problem.

Obviously there are fundamental differences in the philosophies of the political left and right, but there are also ways we are alike.  The most important similarity of all people is our common interest in having a meaningful and purposeful life.  Sure, the definition of a meaningful and purposeful life may change from person to person (especially between conservatives and liberals), but each person's basic desire to fulfill a purpose does not.

Where a person searches for meaning and purpose depends greatly on their political ideology, which I believe is just a reflection of how a person approaches life itself.

Conservatives, with their focus on the individual, will look inward for purpose.  They value religion because it tells them that they have a spark of divinity within their individual self.  [After all, the Bible tells us that we are all made in God's image, and God has even represented Himself as the perfect individual through Jesus Christ.]  A meaningful life, according to a conservative, is one where an individual acts in accordance to God's will and spreads their ideals with a bottom-up approach – an approach that directly influences the people around them by being a good spouse, a good parent, a good friend, a good worker, and, ultimately, a good follower of Jesus (at least for a devote Christian, that is).

Liberals, with their focus on the collective, will look outward for purpose.  They seek to have a powerful influence to culture, to law, to human progress.  To a liberal, having a meaningful life means living a life that directly influences the collective.  The problem with this approach is that influencing the collective requires coercion and force (a top-down approach), which is why liberals will seek to climb the secular ladder of power.  Realizing this power hierarchy of the collective is why a liberal is more likely to appreciate political activism and higher education, both of which give them a sense of having more power in the secular world.  

Both side of the political spectrum are seeking to live a moral and meaningful life, even if we are seeking it in different places.  This search for meaning is what explains the left's attraction to higher education and political activism.  It also explains the right's attraction to religion and family.  Each way of living has served humanity well, so it is important to not denigrate either side's search for meaning.  Doing so could throw off the balance that has allowed humanity to flourish.

On a personal note, I believe there is just one caveat to the respect that should be given to each political perspective.  One philosophy is, in fact, more important than the other.

Before striving to influence the collective – a sentiment that is most common among liberals, no matter their personal expertise – one should put their own life in order first.  In other words, the individual should come first, and the collective should come second.  It would be ideal if only strong individuals look to lead the collective.