Was visiting friends last night. On their TV was a biography of the Clintons. Watched it with a certain degree of interest and pity. It seems from the get-go Bill was a serial philanderer. Hillary knew and seemed to take it all in stride. What was interesting in all of this was how their politics was driven, yes, by ambition, but also by a deep desire to do good for others. Bill had a pretty bad upbringing: violence and adultery in his family, the death of his father, etc. They were drawn to the left wing social justice thing, and I wondered how their lives could be so unhealthy in one way and yet they had a certain - even though misguided - desire to do good for their fellow-man. There must be a correlation. Isn't it easier to fix the externals of others' lives than to cope with the inside, especially one's own insides? Surely.
Left-wing social policy is driven by good will for the abstract 'other.' In the case of the Clintons, terrible inner disarray prompted the sort of escapism afforded by the feel-good politics of the Left. I wonder if there are any broader conclusions that can be drawn here?
Conservatives actually give more money to charities than liberals, although liberals talk more about social welfare. There is a disconnect here. Are the loudest lefties the most internally scarred, disintegrated?
Conservatives are more attached to their families and traditions. Liberals are not. Thus, they default to the abstract 'other.'
Everyone has a deep desire to be good. Some just don't know what it takes.