Happy Liberals

What does a liberal believe? Here is a definition:

1. The free market creates economic imbalances that should be corrected by government.
2. People are entitled to social welfare, and that should be provided by government.
3. Progressive governmental taxation, or incremental taxation based upon success in a free market society, is a good thing.
4. Those who work should pay into a system that supports those who do not work (ie, social security)
5. A single school system should be maintained by the government with taxes. The curriculum should be a top-down determination.
6. Assets accumulated during a lifetime should be largely redistributed by the government upon death.
7. People should be free to live their lives as they desire.
8. Identifiable groups who statistically do poorly in comparison to others in terms of education, employment, or social status fail because of external factors, not internal ones, and deserve special protection and rights.

The summary is that freedom of the individual is compromised for the purpose of equality.

Question: Does this lead to increased happiness in society?

The new psychology of happiness theory is beginning to address the impact of liberal concepts on true happiness, initially with opinion, and slowly with facts. My reading of the latest data would suggest that the true liberal position does not lead to increased happiness. Before dismissing happiness theory, it is important to understand that it is based upon scientific research, which is the hallmark of a true liberal mindset. Conservatives are ruled by established beliefs; liberals are open to science. And yet, the science seems to support the belief that traditional "values" are the keys to true happiness, not based upon belief, but upon brain structure, genetic coding, and basic laws of interaction.

1. A happy life is not based upon economic success. Correcting fluctuations in wealth in the free market will not increase happiness, as long as people are above the level of being destitute.
2. A quid pro quo system, paying it forward, tit-for-tat, works better for spread of happiness than entitlement based "social welfare".
3. Voluntary giving to help others or hiring of others with your largesse is more noble than forcible confiscation based upon a tax code that penalizes success.
4. Individual responsibility is a prerequisite for personal self-respect.
5. An education system that is both bottom up and top down leads to a more complete knowledge base. Furthermore, a single school system that is based on the concept that ultimate success is getting a PhD and becoming a college professor is not in the best interest of individuals who would be artisans, poets, manual laborers, athletes, etc. We are a society where we can see excellence in areas other than the three Rs. Education needs to be overhauled to develop emotionally balanced people who are respected for their chosen careers and professions, instead of one where the intelligensia looks down on those who didn't quite make the grade.
6. There is a regression to the mean. Any inheritance is as likely to be squandered as used wisely by the next generation. Furthermore, wealth is not a zero sum game. If one removes the possibility of using one's wealth to further one's goals after one's death, this will negatively impact the zeal and creativity of people. This can do nothing but reduce happiness.
7. Are all lifestyles equal? Is a single 16 year old drug addict as likely to raise an emotionally stable child as a married couple in their 30's? Data says "No". So, how can all lifestyles be condoned or even tolerated, if we really care about long term happiness? This is just an example. The single 16 year old may have pleasure from the baby, but true happiness will be reduced for her as well as for society. That baby would have more happiness if adopted by the 30 year old couple.
8. Do groups do poorly because of external or internal factors? The success of individuals from all groups would argue that failure to succeed is in part individual characteristics, in part environmental (ie, the tragic surroundings of the child of the single drug-addicted 16 year old who cannot be an effective parent to teach proper life skills), and in part internal social expectation (peer group pressure), and only has limited external factor input. Furthermore, the things we look at to determine "equality" are not directly tied to happiness.

The data would support that the very things that liberals stand for do not lead to more happiness. Perhaps, that is why liberals have such a poor view of their fellow citizens and believe that we need to be under the iron thumb of government.