A good attempt at formulation of the foundational principle for the Right Wing. There's more than a passing semblance to Platonic forms here, something that perhaps bears underscoring, to aid in understanding the format of ontological propriety(OP). I will hasten to add, that the format of the principle as enacted in the human species and our social way of living gives rise to the chicken and egg question about the formation of the principle, which is avoided here by positing the principle of the form being pre-existing.
Could it also not be argued, that the fundamental principle within OP will be hierarchy? The implicit cultural understanding of that term already encapsulates bulk of what the principle tries to represent, I will admit to it missing a lot of metaphysical context that OP underscores. Perhaps there is a disguised sense of "correctness" that one senses about social structures that leads one to subconscious leanings towards one way or another. If so, can OP bear that out in its definition?
I would posit that propriety itself is the fundamental principle in OP, with OP being the most fundamental principle to the Right. My train of thought is that Right and Left in their universal mode must be reducible to principles which are "uncorruptible".
The Left will do anything to achieve equality, but equality itself, in whatever form it takes, is their driving force. This mainly takes the form of being anti-everything: anti-tradition, anti-hierarchy, anti-capitalism, anti-work even, etc, but all of these are corruptible. There can be unequal anti-hierarchy, unequal anti-tradition, unequal anti-capitalism, etc; these are vehicles for achieving equality, but are corruptible. There cannot be unequal equality as principle.
Along the same lines, the Right will do anything to achieve ontological propriety, but that principle of propriety itself is uncorruptible. There can be improper hierarchies, there can be improper families, there can be improper traditions even, but there cannot be improper propriety, and all of these things are the vehicle for achieving propriety.
I would, however, agree that hierarchy is the one principle with an intimate relationship with propriety, however, because propriety is determined by an ontological hierarchy, but this is why we make the distinction that it is "ontological propriety", thus incorporating the ontological hierarchy in our consideration. To say "hierarchical propriety" would lead to certain problems that arise when one asks the question "proper according to which hierarchy?". This is avoided by specifying that it is the "grand ontological hierarchy of Reality itself", which itself is universal.
I would say that Platonic philosophy, along with every legitimate religious tradition, for that matter, is an examination and expression of ontological propriety and its metaphysical foundation, which is precisely why all of these things can be classified as examples of a Right Wing civilizational mode.
A good attempt at formulation of the foundational principle for the Right Wing. There's more than a passing semblance to Platonic forms here, something that perhaps bears underscoring, to aid in understanding the format of ontological propriety(OP). I will hasten to add, that the format of the principle as enacted in the human species and our social way of living gives rise to the chicken and egg question about the formation of the principle, which is avoided here by positing the principle of the form being pre-existing.
Could it also not be argued, that the fundamental principle within OP will be hierarchy? The implicit cultural understanding of that term already encapsulates bulk of what the principle tries to represent, I will admit to it missing a lot of metaphysical context that OP underscores. Perhaps there is a disguised sense of "correctness" that one senses about social structures that leads one to subconscious leanings towards one way or another. If so, can OP bear that out in its definition?
I would posit that propriety itself is the fundamental principle in OP, with OP being the most fundamental principle to the Right. My train of thought is that Right and Left in their universal mode must be reducible to principles which are "uncorruptible".
The Left will do anything to achieve equality, but equality itself, in whatever form it takes, is their driving force. This mainly takes the form of being anti-everything: anti-tradition, anti-hierarchy, anti-capitalism, anti-work even, etc, but all of these are corruptible. There can be unequal anti-hierarchy, unequal anti-tradition, unequal anti-capitalism, etc; these are vehicles for achieving equality, but are corruptible. There cannot be unequal equality as principle.
Along the same lines, the Right will do anything to achieve ontological propriety, but that principle of propriety itself is uncorruptible. There can be improper hierarchies, there can be improper families, there can be improper traditions even, but there cannot be improper propriety, and all of these things are the vehicle for achieving propriety.
I would, however, agree that hierarchy is the one principle with an intimate relationship with propriety, however, because propriety is determined by an ontological hierarchy, but this is why we make the distinction that it is "ontological propriety", thus incorporating the ontological hierarchy in our consideration. To say "hierarchical propriety" would lead to certain problems that arise when one asks the question "proper according to which hierarchy?". This is avoided by specifying that it is the "grand ontological hierarchy of Reality itself", which itself is universal.
I would say that Platonic philosophy, along with every legitimate religious tradition, for that matter, is an examination and expression of ontological propriety and its metaphysical foundation, which is precisely why all of these things can be classified as examples of a Right Wing civilizational mode.