The Ultimate Clash of World Views by DAN JUSTER AUGUST 16, 2020
In one of my recent posts, I distinguished and sought to define the differences between the liberal-left of center Democrat, the leftist Democrat, and the radical far-leftist. The radical left is based on an integrated world view to a much greater extent than the left of center and the left. Some of the positions of the last two are incompatible with a biblical world view, especially on abortion. But the radical left views are almost totally the opposite of Biblical teaching.
When the left of center and left give in to the radical left, they then become an anti-“God of the Bible” force. While some may see the whole Democrat Party as propounding such an anti-God world view, I think such claims go too far and do not take into consideration how much these Democrats are pragmatists, seek their own power and preservation without a clear world view. I don’t think they are coming from a philosophical position, but the leaders of the far left are. There is one point of agreement with the radical left and the Bible. This is that we are to care for the poor and the marginalized and find ways to lift them up and improve their lives. The question is how and, for us, the Gospel is the key without which we do not expect success.
The world view of the radical left is built on totally shaky ground. First, it is built on their subjectively chosen values that have no rooting and are not found historically in other non-western cultures. The best writers admit to this subjectively. It is just their choice. Analytic philosophers show this to be the case when they examine the thinkers of the far left. The philosophy is built from a combination of philosophies. There is a critical school that began in Germany in the 1920s. The most influential in these leftist movements is Herbert Marcuse and his later writings in the 1960s. These writings are full of pontification but not really grounded. I will write more about him in another essay. The views of neo-Marxism and Freud are credited, though academic criticism of these writers has largely discredited them. But in an internet age and on the university campus which is rife with subjectivism, any view can gain traction. In addition, postmodernism has been integrated. It teaches that there is no meta-narrative like the Biblical world view or natural theology or philosophy on which to base one’s life, but one chooses one’s values with the hope that enough will agree to implement the change desired. Their approach to history and literature is deconstruction where the claim is made that history is the narrative of the winning powerful and that literature by such is as well. Yet, since there is no objective history writing, it is all people making power assertions against one another. Therefore, there has to be a tearing down of the western canon. You will see the roots of Antifa in this and the destructive tendencies in the universities. The great Francis Schaffer lectured on Marcuse and a