George Washington said:1 “if Men are to be precluded from offering their sentiments on a matter, which may involve the most serious and alarming consequences, that can invite the consideration of Mankind; reason is of no use to us—the freedom of Speech may be taken away—and, dumb & silent we may be led, like sheep, to the Slaughter.” However, if opinion takes liberties with facts and rejects science—or at least certain theories—doesn’t it risk, if not leading us to the slaughter, then leading us to a form of enslavement?
For example, the world envisioned by Donald Trump appears not only isolated but also out of step with certain historical (e.g., lies about immigration) and scientific (e.g., climate skepticism) realities. Yet, the Republican candidate’s victory enables him, to a certain extent, to shape policy and the economy according to his ideas. Thus, the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, by prohibiting restrictions on freedom of expression, allows individuals to lead tens of millions into error. Under these conditions, one may wonder if the Founding Fathers of the United States were overly confident in human reason.
This overconfidence in reason is more broadly reflected in Enlightenment philosophies,2 which too closely associated progress with reason, and science with ethics. At the same time, they established a link between reason and freedom (reason liberates from superstition and obscurantism) which remains justified, both psychologically and morally: building a worldview or mental universe that denies parts of history and science leads to a form of blindness; it prevents a correct analysis of reality; it fosters a culture of idealizations (especially power ideals in politics) and an excess of negative emotions (anxiety, stress, anger, sadness) that result from various oppositions and uncertainties linked to these idealizations. It fuels the vicious cycle of oppositions and idealizations.3
The populist isolationism currently in vogue in the United States shows a lack of psychological distance from ideals (political, economic, or religious). It is this excessive attachment to ideals that leads to a retreat into oneself (an idealized self), a moral rigidity that prevents finding peaceful coexistence solutions. For American isolationism is no more a guarantee of peace than interventionism: if not waging military war, it seeks to intensify commercial warfare, notably through tariff protections.
The election of Donald Trump for a second term in the White House is part of the political centrifugation I mentioned last June:4 Western countries are facing unprecedented international competition and ever-increasing automation of production processes. How, in such a context, can one maintain the same lifestyle and goals, especially if these goals are economic? For history shows how much the “pursuit of happiness” is a pursuit of material happiness that results from indefinite growth. When economic idealizations excessively guide the freedom to think and express oneself, it becomes all the more understandable that this freedom can lead to authoritarian tendencies that exclude inconvenient realities…
1.↑ https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/99-01-02-10840
2.↑ https://damiengimenez.fr/wpdgi_article_en/progress-and-limits-of-freedom-of-thought-in-europe-from-the-16th-to-the-18th-century/
3.↑ https://damiengimenez.fr/wpdgi_snapshot/do-we-want-to-live-in-peace/
4.↑ https://damiengimenez.fr/wpdgi_snapshot/the-political-centrifugation-revealing-a-societal-deadlock/