Preface
I should say that I am in no way against Liberalism and any schools of thought associated with general modern Liberalism. A comparison could be made between schools of thought and physics is that there is a dichotomy between the classic approach and the modern approach.
In physics, the classic approach is the Newtonian style of physics where mathematics is useful and vector/scalar values are relatively small. It is the approach where the action at a distance concept applies. However, in modern physics Newtonian physics is virtually overhauled completely, and the action-at-a-distance idea is replaced by the concept of fundamental particles and the wave-particle duality. Not to mention in modern physics relativistic theory and quantum theory are used in which mathematics falls down completely nearing the apex of theory. Precision and accuracy in classic physics is instead replaced by quantum probability, namely Heisenberg’s Principle of Uncertainty (where velocity and position cannot both be measured exactly).
Much like modern schools of thoughts, there is a lot of grey area in between opposed to the clear distinction between the left and the right wings. To me, the modern framework of schools of thought does cause confusion since words like “liberalism” and “conservatism” are thrown around virtually every single day yet their original meanings have become distorted. As a result of such, in this article I will attempt to rigorously define the terms so that, at least to me, there will not be much confusion.
PART 1. POLARIZATION
I highly recommend reading Genocidal Organ as a thought provoker to understand the way that words and language work, as it truly makes a good premise for the current way the media functions. Words have a lot of influence, from the extreme to the moderate, on human emotions. Certain words incite stronger emotions than others, and leads to people feeling more inclined towards certain ideas than others. I suppose, to some extent, that is the power of the foundation of the human society as a collective. After all, communication is what we use on a daily basis. From how I see it, bias is inevitable as it is part of being human. Even those who claim to be ‘fully objective’ are biased and are inclined towards on ideology compared to another as a result of the subjectivity of objectivity. (See: researcher’s bias/confirmation bias).
Based on these biases, I usually do not discriminate or disparage people for their opinions unless it is polarizing and unjustified. However, something which I cannot tolerate is the current way the mass media functions, as it to some extent can be considered propaganda. Not to discredit the liberal ideology, the majority of media outlets are vastly left wing (i.e. in the modern sense that they trend towards equality and individual freedoms, or what many would consider nowadays, social justice.) While this has had its many benefits on society, such as the various advancement of civil and social issues, we have seen many drawbacks in recent years. I feel like in this case the United States of America would be a very notable case study since the left wing media has indeed contributed to many of the issues in recent years, ranging from the riots (if you read the article you once again notice the confusion between the different school of thought terms being thrown around) to the general suppression of different ideologies (read: Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber.)
If one were to do research on any recent social issues, any semblance of what we would consider to be objectivity, or the semblance to other ideologies that are not left wing is quite minimal, if not nonexistent. While I do not support nor go against the various issues that have occurred, I feel that general discussions need to be raised about the various social issues that have occurred, opposed to the blatant attacks on any persons or ideologies that do not coincide itself to what is the modern left wing thought. It does not take one to venture very far into the internet to see the effects of the media bias. The Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the Independent, CNN, MSNBC, and Buzzfeed are all pivotal to the promotion of what I would consider borderline extreme modern liberal ideology due to the immense media polarization of the majority of news articles written by their employed journalists. The Wall Street Journal just recently was the centrepiece involved in a fiasco involving YouTube which has led to a massive change in YouTube’s monetization policy. From these issues and more, I feel that the media bias has become more of a damage to society than it can be a good thing as it promotes a central homogeneous ideology that does not allow dissent.
In a time where it is becoming more important to be aware of the various issues in the world from many different perspectives (such as the rivalry between the two superpowers, the United States of America and the Russian Federations), these media outlets which does not promote critical thinking abilities can only serve to create detriments and ultimately cause more harm than good if tensions do rise. Instead of destroying dissenting and opposing ideologies, we should be more open and accept more discussion pointers. Let us think critical, accept different ideologies to truly make an impact.