Does Economic Freedom Foster Tolerance?

[Tetro Kornbluth]

"Economic Freedom" is a nonsense concept.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

I shall elaborate later but for now I will just ask: If it is the case that market economics and trade help boost tolerance towards, say, homosexuals why was it the golden era of laissez faire capitalism (ie. the late 19th Century) was the era that some of the worst oppression towards homosexuals in the history of western society? In fact, it was the era that thanks to Kraft-Ebbing, saw the disemanation of "homosexuality" as concept as distinct to "heterosexuality" and was conceived as primarily biological in nature (with "homosexuality" being seen often as due to faulty biology).

And if the first statement is in fact the case, why was it that the movement for homosexual rights (or at least in US terms the post-stonewall movement) grew out of social tendencies which were ranged from very hostile to at least indifferent towards "Capitalism" as it actually existed at the time?

[Tetro Kornbluth]

I shall elaborate later but for now I will just ask: If it is the case that market economics and trade help boost tolerance towards, say, homosexuals why was it the golden era of laissez faire capitalism (ie. the late 19th Century) was the era that some of the worst oppression towards homosexuals in the history of western society? In fact, it was the era that thanks to Kraft-Ebbing, saw the disemanation of "homosexuality" as concept as distinct to "heterosexuality" and was conceived as primarily biological in nature (with "homosexuality" being seen often as due to faulty biology).

And if the first statement is in fact the case, why was it that the movement for homosexual rights (or at least in US terms the post-stonewall movement) grew out of social tendencies which were ranged from very hostile to at least indifferent towards "Capitalism" as it actually existed at the time?

It probably is a mistake to take a crack at a regression analysis across not only space, but time, I would think.

Which makes the research worthless... time is what we live n.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

I shall elaborate later but for now I will just ask: If it is the case that market economics and trade help boost tolerance towards, say, homosexuals why was it the golden era of laissez faire capitalism (ie. the late 19th Century) was the era that some of the worst oppression towards homosexuals in the history of western society? In fact, it was the era that thanks to Kraft-Ebbing, saw the disemanation of "homosexuality" as concept as distinct to "heterosexuality" and was conceived as primarily biological in nature (with "homosexuality" being seen often as due to faulty biology).

And if the first statement is in fact the case, why was it that the movement for homosexual rights (or at least in US terms the post-stonewall movement) grew out of social tendencies which were ranged from very hostile to at least indifferent towards "Capitalism" as it actually existed at the time?

Both you and Redalgo seem to misunderstand the way regression analysis is used. No one is claiming that economic freedom determines tolerance. There is hardly any such relation existing  in any social science.

Then what is the point of this research?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Arguing that would require quite a bit of historical revisionism, you know... (Of course one the things which has changed is that Capitalism has become identified with "Trade/Exchange" rather than the work system like it was in the past. Perhaps this is an inevitable part of the changes in perception that have become about due to the shift towards a consumer society.)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Please describe to me the "mechanism" through which values changed. Remember we talking about a period which lasted for at least a century.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So what the pro-gay rights movement thinks/thought is irrelevant to the spread of gay rights? Okkkkk......

Also what Al said.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

'Economic Freedom' is a piece of political language and a statement about values and so on, and so is not a useful description of anything. 'Tolerance' is also not exactly an objective concept. Which makes this a project like this - no matter how many factors are 'controlled' for - a hilarious waste of time and other resources. The logic isn't so very far off some of the less edifying Marxist approaches to social sciences popular in the 1970s...

Well, that's another line of attack, of course. But you'd have to specifically argue that the variables they use do not reflect those things. I think they seem like decent enough proxies for what I would mean by those terms. What do you disagree with precisely?

Gully, the point is to find whether economic freedom (as defined in this study) leads to more tolerance. Why wouldn't that be worthwhile? If it isn't, do you think all social science is worthless because it can't establish causal relationships that are 100% determined?

No; don't be silly. Though I will say again that I don't believe in social "science". However, are you seriously suggesting that "freedom" is a measurable concept? (And please no strawmen-type responses). Especially "Economic freedom"? Nonsense.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No. It's meaningless nonsense. And meaningless ideological nonsense at that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How is that an effect of economic freedom? And btw, here lets not forget the first great example of cross-continental oceanic trade (clearly this brought a great deal of tolerance to the world).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That is a completely and utterly absurd analogy. That is Libertas' level of debating. You surely see the difference between an ideologically driven movement and the accidental consequences of such a movement?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And I'm saying your mechanism is a lot of balls. Give me reasons telling me why it isn't?

[Tetro Kornbluth]

'Economic Freedom' = Wealth? (In which case, and excuse the ProgRock reference,: 'You who are rich and whose troubles are few/May come around to my point of view.')

Obviously Free Markets don't necessarily foster tolerance. If anything the way anti-immigrant sentiments and a certain brand of right-wing neoliberal politics have been converging in certain parts of Europe should show that the idea is nonsensical.

No need to apologize. This forum needs more prog rock references.

Of course the fact that your post was absolutely correct is another reason not to apologize.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

I would also argue, actually, that the the neo-liberal "globalization" of economic markets creates conditions that foster inequality, divisiveness, suspicion, xenophobia, an increase in religious bigotry, ethnic clashes, and other oh-so-wonderful things.

This is more evident when you consider that conditions for the poor and working classes of much of the world have not improved, but have overall deteriorated since the age of globalization, deregulation, and privatization began.

But hey, a small portion of the world's population have improved their standing enormously, so it's all good, right?

Vast swathes of the globe have improved their standard of living dramatically in the last 30 years, including most of Latin America, China, Southeast Asia and India, which is more than half the world's population right there. In fact, the transition has been simply amazing, along with the dramatically falling fertility rates, which go in tandem with it all typically these days.

Last 60 years really.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Vast swathes of the globe have improved their standard of living dramatically in the last 30 years, including most of Latin America, China, Southeast Asia and India, which is more than half the world's population right there. In fact, the transition has been simply amazing, along with the dramatically falling fertility rates, which go in tandem with it all typically these days.

So?  Why on earth should an american electorate care one whit about that?

What has that got to do with the price of potatoes?  Anyway, the "american electorate" should care about it if they have a clue about anything.

Why mention the last 30 years, Torie, as you damn well know that process has been happening for longer than that. (And in some of those places, thirty or twenty years was their modern economic nadir. See: Brazil's 80s Debt Crisis.