Framing liberal vs. conservative models of government

[velvetpage]

Red family, blue family

The article points out that both liberals and conservatives tend to frame the government-citizen relationship as one of family, but they have different models for family. Conservatives tend to see family as a network of inherited obligations, where the freedom to choose not to fulfill your obligations is a bad thing. Liberals tend to see family as a collection of voluntary commitments.

It was a fascinating read. It's also interesting to note that I'm right smack on the dividing line between the two. I have inherited obligations that i will not shirk, up to a point. That is, if neither of my sisters is in a position to look after my dad when he needs it, I'll step up to the plate - but not far enough to actually have him in my home. He's family, and we'll take care of him. My mom does that for my grandparents. My MIL does that for Aunt Amy and Uncle Frank - Aunt Amy is actually her father's cousin. I have no doubt that I will spend a good portion of my life meeting those inherited obligations, and I'm absolutely fine with that. At the same time, I run my life much more on the chosen commitments model. The friends with whom I surround myself are not my friends because we all grew up in the same church, they're my friends because we have things in common. I chose a limited family of no more than three kids, and I subscribe to the belief that the nurturing I give them is more of a gift than an investment. I hope they'll reciprocate and care for me when I'm old, but they are not really under an obligation to do so.

As I said, fascinating read for anyone interested in politics and political discourse.

Thanks neosis for the link.

Comments

[lovmelovmycats.livejournal.com]

Thanks for sharing! I liked the article. It rang true for me. I would like to share it with my brother (he's very religious and conservative), but I think he may read it defensively.

[kesmun.livejournal.com]

As I commented when I saw neosis's original comment, I'm also in the dividing line. I definitely think it's due to the way our parents raised us. Mine are very much typical baby-boomers in many ways, including those of shedding the old ways that didn't make sense.

My mom is very much more the type that adheres to the inherited obligation model, though. I think that part of it stems from her reactionism to how she was raised. Her mother's family was fairly dysfunctional, and her father's family was close, so she naturally gravitated to the happier side.

Dad, on the other hand, came from a very traditional inherited-obligation family (his parents took in his cousins when my grandmother's sister died and raised them as their own kids), but definitely tends more toward the negotiated commitment side.

I think the way that this comes out in people like you and me is that we do choose our commitments, but our first choices tend to be family.

[neosis.livejournal.com]

Hmm. I'm not sure that I've completely understood the article but it seems that one of the main differences between the negotiated and inherited models is that in the negotiated model if a particular relationship is bad, you may choose to shut it off.

I guess it seems that the idea is that you could, in theory, choose not to offer your support to a family member in the negotiated framework, while you really can't in the inherited model. Ironically, even in the negotiated model, I think most people do feel that they could not in fact, refuse to offer support to particular family members, but that is likely the sign of a healthy negotiated relationship.

I suppose the biggest difference is how you would deal with a "bad seed" to whom you should have an inhereted obligation. An abusive parent or a destructive sibling, for example. I'm sure there is a spectrum here somewhere, although I'm having trouble envisioning it. I think the spectrum has to run along the number of people to whom you must have inherited obligations (Parents/Siblings/Extended Family) to and the number and kind of those obligations (Support/Support & Obey/Support & Obey & Continue the Family).

I think I'm going to need a little time to fully absorb the frames.

[kesmun.livejournal.com]

We've actually shut out family members at various times, some permanently, some not. But we're still likely to choose family as the first ones we make commitments to, and we do take on our spouses' families.