Is strength in efficiency different from strength in form? I hope to disconnect utilitarianism from liberalism, as this site seems to hold them both in union.
Kudzu is fully adapted to reality, and as such grows plentifully and strong, but species on an island can adapt to changing and uncommon influences, thus producing unique types.
It seems our modern western world allows more insulation from reality, thus we see more divergence, most of which is garbage, some of which is beautiful, all of which is "random".
All the while the Kudzu argues endurance, and does so successfully as the tropical species grow and perish.
Will we demand efficiency and strength from ourselves (or other divergent beings), or can we view the weaker with aesthetics or hope?
In all, what is most effective seems to be the least liberal. We pretend to the former while shooting towards the latter. Reality is harsh and they cannot honestly mingle.
Perhaps it is the attitude that the weaker can have as much political voice as the stronger, and in so neutralize to a sad grey.
The question then becomes: if we can agree that those with vision can and should lead, according to what standard shall we then judge? If we allow divergence of the human experience, this form will rarely succeed without struggle. If we disallow human divergence, shall we use Traditional virtue?
What then is this traditional virtue? Certainly a neoplatonic worldview is intuitively simple for those at or above an intellectual watermark. Shall the rest be dragged along? How can we judge abuse of power, and who can levy such a claim?
I do not extend these ideas Socratically because they will have to be overcome if this sort of thinking is to flourish.