Liberté or fraternité - which one is more ignored?

[Martinus]

Started following my exchange with Valmy in another thread where I stated that noobody likes/cares for fraternité (of the French revolutionary trio) any more but Valmy countered that it is liberté that is the red headed step child of modern politics.

I disagree. I think both equality and liberty have political proponents, while "fraternity" is forgotten. In fact, many aspects of it (clubs, fraternities, masonic lodges, orders and similar associations) are imho looked down upon in the modern world as relics of the past at best and dysfunctional tools promoting nepotism, discrimination and elitism at worst.

Discuss.

[Malthus]

I was never sure exactly what was meant by "fraternité".

[Monoriu]

I was never sure exactly what was meant by "fraternité".

Same here.  Liberty and Equality I understand.  I don't understand how my right to fraternise is being threatened. 

[crazy canuck]

Not sure where you are going with this Marti.  Freedom of association is a well recognized right.  Probably the most protected of the three.

[Martinus]

I was never sure exactly what was meant by "fraternité".

I think it is the most social or "horizontal" of the three "virtues" of the revolution.

Liberty and equality can, theoretically, exist without you ever acknowledging the fellow human being - they are simply directives to the state, telling it that it cannot restrict your liberty and that it must treat you equally with others. As long as the state acts in accordance with these directives, it does not care whether people are nasty or nice.

Fraternity or fellowship goes beyond that and creates a directive for the people. It means both the freedom of association - so you can choose who your "brothers" (closer and more distant) are - but also means looking at the fellow man as a "brother" and not an enemy or competitor. It means being willing to share or help, to provide aid. I think this one of the three "virtues" is the one most often forgotten in modern politics - whether it is about helping the poor in your country or forgiving another country's debts.

[Valmy]

I was being more specific to France

I think fraternité, in a nationalistic and ethnic sense, tends to be a big deal to the French rightwing. Though I guess extreme right wing these days. I know the Nazis famously would do things like have rich and poor and aristocrats and peasants sit down for a big common meal and do German things together. That has to dampen a bit of the luster on those types of efforts

In modern society you might be right Marty. It is highly encouraged that you treat everybody fairly and not group together in fraternal groups based on some shared trait. And I think it was used in the French Revolution to mean the brotherhood of France, that you are supposed to all work together for the nation and not serve your ancien regime privilege. I am not sure how that would resonate today.

[Martinus]

Not sure where you are going with this Marti.  Freedom of association is a well recognized right.  Probably the most protected of the three.

Check out this link - fraternity is NOT only (or even not mainly) about freedom of association. It is a moral obligation of fellowship between men:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libert%C3%A9,_%C3%A9galit%C3%A9,_fraternit%C3%A9

[Martinus]

I was being more specific to France

I think fraternité, in a nationalistic and ethnic sense, tends to be a big deal to the French rightwing. Though I guess extreme right wing these days. I know the Nazis famously would do things like have rich and poor and aristocrats and peasants sit down for a big common meal and do German things together. That has to dampen a bit of the luster on those types of efforts

In modern society you might be right Marty. It is highly encouraged that you treat everybody fairly and not group together in fraternal groups based on some shared trait. And I think it was used in the French Revolution to mean the brotherhood of France, that you are supposed to all work together for the nation and not serve your ancien regime privilege. I am not sure how that would resonate today.

I agree. I also thought about corporatism, which you mention as well, as that would have been the political system most closely built on the concept of fraternity (to the exclusion of liberty and equality).

[Valmy]

It also had a patriotic bent to it but granted sometimes it would be universalized.

[celedhring]

Not sure where you are going with this Marti.  Freedom of association is a well recognized right.  Probably the most protected of the three.

Check out this link - fraternity is NOT only (or even not mainly) about freedom of association. It is a moral obligation of fellowship between men:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libert%C3%A9,_%C3%A9galit%C3%A9,_fraternit%C3%A9

If that's the interpretation (I'm also confused about what exactly the term entails), then redistributive policies widely endorsed by the left would be "fraternity".

[Martinus]

Not sure where you are going with this Marti.  Freedom of association is a well recognized right.  Probably the most protected of the three.

Check out this link - fraternity is NOT only (or even not mainly) about freedom of association. It is a moral obligation of fellowship between men:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libert%C3%A9,_%C3%A9galit%C3%A9,_fraternit%C3%A9

If that's the interpretation (I'm also confused about what exactly the term entails), then redistributive policies widely endorsed by the left would be "fraternity".

It would be, but I think in today's politics the redistributive policies are to a large extent vilified or at least abandonned. The left have moved, imo, much more strongly towards equality, leaving fraternity as the after-thought, and the right is also fundamentally opposed to it in any form.

[Duque de Bragança]

Valmy is getting soft with age. He should have pointed out that Marty's question does not matter, and that Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité OU LA MORT, popular during the red year of 1793, sounds much better.   

[crazy canuck]

Not sure where you are going with this Marti.  Freedom of association is a well recognized right.  Probably the most protected of the three.

Check out this link - fraternity is NOT only (or even not mainly) about freedom of association. It is a moral obligation of fellowship between men:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libert%C3%A9,_%C3%A9galit%C3%A9,_fraternit%C3%A9

I am still not sure what you are advocating.  Western democracies do not compel association.  That is the stuff of dictators.  We have preserved the aspect which is consistent with a pluralistic democracy.

[Martinus]

I guess my point is that fraternity, as Valmy and celedhring point out, would be, broadly, composed of two elements - a patriotic/community element for feeling kinship with other people of your nation, and a redistributive element of willingly (or at least, structurally) sharing your wealth with those less fortunate.

My theory is that, while liberty and equality are fine and well, as they are being championed to various degrees by the left and the right, fraternity was more or less left by the wayside. The "patriotic" element of fraternity has been compromised by fascism/nationalism and is considered toxic by a lot of the left; the "redistributive" element has been compromised by communism and is considered anathema by the right and considered less important by the left, which now tends to champion the "third way" and focus on equality instead (so it tends to champion LGBT rights, gender equality, etc.).

As a result societies are seen less as cohesive collectives but rather more or less random aggregations of individuals - each with his or her own agenda, and each more or less autonomous. I am not saying it is necessarily a bad thing but that's how I see it.

[Valmy]

Valmy is getting soft with age. He should have pointed out that Marty's question does not matter, and that Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité OU LA MORT during, the red year of 1793, sound much better.   

I just figure somethings are self-evident