It's true that the ability to coordinate and harness human talent is the fundamental task of civilization, but I think the author is missing a step where they accurately link that to successful left wing policy. The author doesn't appear to address counterexamples.
Using his own 'man landing on the moon' scenario. Why did the USA beat the USSR to the moon? Then subsequently pull ahead technologically? Was the USA in the 1950-1980s more or less left wing than the USSR? Was East Germany more or less 'left wing' than West Germany?
Has China's swift rise coincided with a shift to the left in their economic system or a shift to allow market forces?
>I am writing this on a laptop produced by a chain of activity stretching across the planet. Thousands of people were involved in turning sand, rare metals, aluminium ore, petroleum and electrical energy into the slab of silicon, metal and plastic sitting in front of me. Engineers designed its processors. Miners extracted its materials. Factory workers assembled its components. Software developers wrote the systems that allow me to use it. No single person knows how to turn the raw materials into a computer. Once again, no one needs to.
No one needs to, because it's much easier to coordinate a market economy according to self-interest than it is to centrally plan every step of the process. "I, Pencil" is usually a defense of market economies, and their ability to coordinate the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I,_Pencil
The history leans to the left is the core underpinning of communist parties everywhere, hence the coopting of the term progressive and progress.
The role of the communist party wherever it resides is to accelerate the historical forces to the proletariat utopia they believe lies at the end of history.
This is of course ridiculous, there is no end state of history, other than everyone died.
And of course the author confuses liberalism with the left as many in the Anglosphere do, mostly because they have lived in places where the "left" party is usually some sort of social democrats at their most extreme.
Ah, yes. That's why Germany transformed from abject poverty after losing WWI into a superpower under the left wing management of the National Socialists.
Short answer is --- "Yes", hstory shows that reality has a liberal bias.
Historically, "societies that waste human capacity through exclusion and conflict" end up poorer as a result.
And the proof is smacking you up the side of the head as we speak. "America First" (aka Israel First) is about regressive isolation, threats, intimidation, open conflict, increased taxes (aka "tariffs") and economic contraction.
Deny it if it makes you feel better about yourself but the cold, hard results will continue to speak for themselves.
> "America First" (aka Israel First) is about regressive isolation
You seem to be confused about whether you want the US to be isolationist or not — or is it only humans that you don’t like that you’d want to exclude?
Any confusion is obviously yours --- "America First" is not only bad policy but also failed rhetoric that was blatantly ignored by the promoter in chief.
I mean Egyptians and Sumerians were some of the longest lasting dynasties and they were extremely regressive and exclusionary. They had a small wealthy elite and lots of poor subjects. Feudalism, humanity's most common and enduring economic system was built around inequity, privilege for the few and repression.
Assyrians were extremely successful and they would commit random murder of their subject population.
I guess you can hold a mirror to just modern civilization and say western civilization... If you forget the racism and sexism of the 20th century... Which leaves the current society and if you're saying the society you live in is the most enlightened and progressive well I mean that sounds like the definition of bias
Not really, and even in your example, liberalism is strictly a right-wing ideology. The issue comes down to people using internal biases labeling ideologies according to their own in group biases, ie "left-wing is good and i'm a liberal therefore liberalism is left-wing". There are very few true left-wing politicians left in the western world (true communist/anarchist).
The issue comes down to people using internal biases labeling ideologies according to their own in group
And I bet the thought never occurred to you that you just did exactly the same thing.
There are very few true right-wing politicians left in the western world (true fascist/dictators).
When one person is allowed to raise taxes, restrict trade, pick economic winners and loser by way of government investment and even go to war --- what do you call that form of government? It certainly isn't "democracy" or "freedom" --- economic or political.
The real truth --- there are no strict ideologies in the real world. Anything practical ends up being a mixture of some sort so we're really talking about degrees here.
https://www.connector.inc/president-donald-j-trump-s-governm...