# What is the most arrogant political philosophy of all? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 9, 2017, 7:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706 "2017-01-09T07:40:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![igor\_frankensteen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/839c29/32.png) [@igor\_frankensteen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/igor_frankensteen)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2017, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/61 "2017-01-11T03:27:20Z")
As usual with such discussions, I see we don’t have a shared definition of the keyword ‘arrogance.’ As for my own take on this, with ‘arrogance’ being defined as ‘overbearing behavior combined with self-proclaimed superiority,’ I don’t see any ‘arrogant’ belief systems. Only arrogant individuals. And the most insufferably arrogant individuals I’ve run across, have always been whoever is proclaiming that they believe in ‘freedom of the individual’ more than anyone else does. In my youth, the most arrogant, were those who claimed they didn’t obey ANY ‘ism’ at all, on the grounds that if it was a SYSTEM of belief, that it prevented the spontaneity they prized. So I suppose my hierarchy of arrogance would go something like 1. self-proclaimed ‘free thinkers/free lifers,’ the ones who insist that NO system has anything positive to offer; 2. anyone who proclaimed that there was only ONE aspect of life which showed who was ‘the best,’ and who thought they epitomized same; 3. all political/religious/philosophy extremists, including self-proclaimed ‘independents;’ 4. self-proclaimed geniuses. 5. self-proclaimed ‘servants of humanity;’ From there, it gets boring. But again, I think we should stipulate that it doesn’t qualify as arrogance, if it’s just claims of superiority, or unique knowledge. It isn’t arrogance, until it includes the overbearing behavior, and a refusal to moderate same, even when the person KNOWS they are trampling others. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2017, 3:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/62 "2017-01-11T03:29:58Z")
I don’t think we’re talking about people being arrogant-- people can be arrogant while holding any political philosophy. I think the idea is which philosophy is based on the most arrogant idea. The poster who mentioned Absolute Monarch was, I believe, on the right track. The idea is based on the notion that one person is better than everyone else in the country. That the country is, literally, bound up in the personage of the monarch. ---
**Author:** ![Salvor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Salvor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Salvor)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2017, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/63 "2017-01-11T03:45:05Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Arrogance is not inherently bad. > > Arrogance in combination with stupidity, though, is deadly. Ah, so then you are with me on hating libertarianism. ---
**Author:** ![Salvor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Salvor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Salvor)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2017, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/64 "2017-01-11T03:56:43Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > I am a moderate libertarian myself (that means that radical Libertarians irritate and seem insane even to me). There are a couple of key things that people with different political philosophies consistently fail to grasp about libertarianism. > > The first is that it isn’t the same as anarchism. In fact, anarchy and libertarianism come from completely different philosophies (e.g. the quickest way to piss a libertarian off are to make references to Somalia or Mad Max because that shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the philosophy; those aren’t libertarian at all). Libertarians believe in strong government but one that is severely restricted in scope. > > The other is harder for people of leftist or even liberal tendencies to understand because they aren’t used to thinking that way. \*\*The whole purpose of libertarianism is to maximize _individual_ freedom including property rights. As long it achieves that, it is impossible for it to fail by definition. There is no promise of collective societal gains (or losses for that matter) nor a prescribed outcome. It is perfectly fine, and even expected, under libertarian philosophy for some people to fail spectacularly but that isn’t a flaw as long as everyone’s individual rights are protected equally under the law. Of course, most libertarians want everyone to maximize their own individual freedoms to produce a harmonious and prosperous aggregate but those freedoms also include the freedom to fail in many ways as well. \*\* > > I suppose the “lack of empathy” argument is somewhat justified when you compare it to some of the more hand-wringing, collective philosophies but it is a valid and much needed philosophy that focuses attention on individual rights. This right here is all find and good, and very honest, but most libertarians I’ve encountered do not stop there. If it was just a sterile preference for individual rights separate and apart from how such models of governance actually affects the prosperity and happiness and lives in a society, that would be one thing. But no, they make STRONGER claims, with ZERO empirical evidence, that libertarian policies like relying on the free market ALWAYS produce the best outcomes. Private schools, including the funding of schools (yes, k-12 too) healthcare - we just need less regulation and more CHOICE !!! Yes, because there is nothing different between something like cosmetic surgery that is less regulated and general healthcare that seeks to patch people up or saved their lives. Cosmetics vs you pay this fee or YOU DIE !!! Nope, nothing at ALL different about THOSE kinds of markets, just let them be free and things will be fine. You can see how obviously false this is with increasing Vet costs, as pets have become increasingly valued and the options to keep them alive increases, you see ever increasing costs for vet care. Not a lot of “oppressive” constraints and regulation there, so why the increases in costs? Nevermind, I’m just blabbering, magical pixue dust free markets must not be totally active. /prays 5 times a day to the market fairy They make claims about the world without evidence, assert it’s true because it must be true because it aligns with their internal models of an ideal economic system. They need to stop being suck fucking pussies. IF it’s really just about property rights and a moral argument, they need to stop pretending they give a damn about outcomes and just come out and say that is irrelevant to them. If it’s coupled to some vision that libertarian policies produce the best results, then they need to be slapped across the face with the humility stick because their assertions about reality are out of control. ---
**Author:** ![Salvor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Salvor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Salvor)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2017, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/65 "2017-01-11T04:07:13Z")
> [@Max\_Torque](#): > > My brother made a claim at being libertarian once. He confidently said, “The government should only be involved in emergency services like 911 and fire departments, and building roads. That’s it. The rest should be free market.” > > I looked at him incredulously. \*\*“Dude, you _moved to a different state_ so your autistic son would be able to get government-provided therapy.” \*\* > > That’s some mighty fine arrogance right there. Libertarianism seems like a good concept, until you need something above and beyond. What did he say? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2017, 6:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/66 "2017-01-11T06:24:18Z")
> [@Salvor](#): > > Ah, so then you are with me on hating libertarianism. Well, the stupider forms of it, anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2017, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/67 "2017-01-11T16:47:19Z")
No love for nihilism? ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2017, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/68 "2017-01-11T20:14:41Z")
IMHO, universal nihilism escapes being arrogant, because the believer thinks he, himself, is “nothing” as much as everyone else, the universe, reality, etc. Social nihilists get some of the same excuse: if “everyone is powerless to change the system,” then the speaker himself is powerless and insignificant. It’s the egoists – “I’m the only important factor in my own life” – that are arrogant. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2017, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/69 "2017-01-11T21:15:17Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > A majority of Americans don’t think prayer in school is an act of “establishing religion”. So, the government can do that. Okay, let’s approach this from the other direction. If you’re disputing the idea that majority rule is the basis of our government, then what do you feel is the basis of it? It can’t be the President or Congress (or Governors or state legislatures) - those are all chosen by majority rule. So who’s running the country in your view? If the majority of Americans want school prayer, who’s the individual or individuals who are saying no to school prayer? Does America have a King, a House of Lords, a Guardian Council, a Beloved Leader, or a Committee of Public Safety? ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2017, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/70 "2017-01-11T21:21:03Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > No love for nihilism? Love it, hate it. Makes no difference. It’s all pointless. ---
**Author:** ![igor\_frankensteen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/839c29/32.png) [@igor\_frankensteen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/igor_frankensteen)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2017, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/71 "2017-01-12T02:50:46Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I don’t think we’re talking about people being arrogant-- people can be arrogant while holding any political philosophy. I think the idea is which philosophy is based on the most arrogant idea. The poster who mentioned Absolute Monarch was, I believe, on the right track. The idea is based on the notion that one person is better than everyone else in the country. That the country is, literally, bound up in the personage of the monarch. ``` Yes, well you see, that goes to the point I am trying to make. I do NOT find the assertion of Divine Right, to be inherently "arrogant." In human history, the idea of a King having the Divine Right to Rule, that Divine Right was ALWAYS seen as being linked to a Divine requirement of great responsibility to rule WELL. A king LOST their "divine right," if they did a bad job of things. ``` The purpose of declaring a Divine Right of Kings, was a practical one. It has repeatedly been discarded by societies, precisely because, as useful as it is to establish the most efficient form of government, it is also the easiest form of government to just as efficiently fail. I assert that there is zero difference in “Arrogance Quotient” between the claim that The King is the be all end all of power and rights, and the claim that “The People” are the exact same thing. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2017, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/72 "2017-01-12T03:39:01Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Okay, let’s approach this from the other direction. If you’re disputing the idea that majority rule is the basis of our government, then what do you feel is the basis of it? It can’t be the President or Congress (or Governors or state legislatures) - those are all chosen by majority rule. > > So who’s running the country in your view? If the majority of Americans want school prayer, who’s the individual or individuals who are saying no to school prayer? Does America have a King, a House of Lords, a Guardian Council, a Beloved Leader, or a Committee of Public Safety? The constitution “runs things.” It takes much more than a majority to get around it. So long as pretty much everyone agrees that the constitution sets the ultimate limits – and it takes a pretty damn gutsy politician to deny that – then we do not operate under “majority rule,” but under “majority rule within limits.” ---
**Author:** ![Max\_Torque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Max\_Torque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_Torque)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2017, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/73 "2017-01-12T15:46:36Z")
> [@Salvor](#): > > What did he say? What such people usually say. “Well, that’s different.” “Okay, how?” Never got a good answer from him. ---
**Author:** ![Corry\_El](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecae2f/32.png) [@Corry\_El](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corry_El)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2017, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/74 "2017-01-12T16:12:31Z")
> [@Max\_Torque](#): > > What such people usually say. “Well, that’s different.” “Okay, how?” Never got a good answer from him. Seems like that’s more hypocrisy than arrogance, but you know him so maybe it’s both. 🙂 In general though I don’t buy the idea that somebody is necessarily hypocritical (or arrogant) not to believe in a public benefit they themselves access. I can see the point where the gap is really yawning as your example, the person not only opposes in theory a pretty high end welfare state benefit they’re taking advantage of, but says the govt should _just_ build roads etc. But many times I’ve seen people accused of hypocrisy if eg. they pay X tax rate or take Y deduction per the rules though they say they believe in higher tax rates or eliminating that deduction (‘then why aren’t paying more voluntarily, or refusing to take that deduction?’). There has to be some leeway for the idea of following the rules as written, even to your benefit when not compelled to, but believing those rules should be changed. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2017, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/75 "2017-01-12T17:49:50Z")
I note with some amusement that, unless I missed it, there is no vote for liberals or progressives. Well, until now. Because I so vote. ---
**Author:** ![PigArcher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/bcef8e/32.png) [@PigArcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PigArcher)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2017, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/76 "2017-01-12T18:03:06Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > I note with some amusement that, unless I missed it, there is no vote for liberals or progressives. Well, until now. Because I so vote. Care to make any argument in support of your position, or should we just accept you’re right without evidence? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2017, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/77 "2017-01-12T18:03:25Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > I note with some amusement that, unless I missed it, there is no vote for liberals or progressives. Well, until now. Because I so vote. Your “No-You!” vote is so noted. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2017, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/78 "2017-01-12T18:37:51Z")
> [@PigArcher](#): > > Care to make any argument in support of your position, or should we just accept you’re right without evidence? Listen to how liberals relate to, and talk about, conservatives. They dismiss “flyover country” as being largely irrelevant, and frequently consider conservatives evil, stupid, and otherwise unacceptable for the mere fact of being conservative. It happens all over this board. Always has. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2017, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/79 "2017-01-12T18:44:25Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > Listen to how liberals relate to, and talk about, conservatives. They dismiss “flyover country” as being largely irrelevant, and frequently consider conservatives evil, stupid, and otherwise unacceptable for the mere fact of being conservative. It happens all over this board. Always has. And _if_ this were correct, would you say your opinion of liberals was more tempered, with less inclination to attack with a broad brush? ---
**Author:** ![PigArcher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/bcef8e/32.png) [@PigArcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PigArcher)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2017, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706/80 "2017-01-12T18:51:05Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > Listen to how liberals relate to, and talk about, conservatives. They dismiss “flyover country” as being largely irrelevant, and frequently consider conservatives evil, stupid, and otherwise unacceptable for the mere fact of being conservative. It happens all over this board. Always has. Never seen it once. _Conservative ideas_ are frequently described as stupid and evil, but surely you see the difference? And the whole “liberals dismiss flyover country” narrative only exists in RW media, not real life. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-most-arrogant-political-philosophy-of-all/776706.md?page=5)