Two wings of the same bird: How liberalism in all forms masks the same system of control

Introduction

In today's political landscape, it often feels like we’re trapped in a tug-of-war between the right and the left. Conservative liberalism touts the virtues of tradition, limited government, and national sovereignty. Progressive liberalism pushes for greater social justice, expanded individual freedoms, and more governmental intervention. At first glance, these two seem at odds with one another, representing opposing sides of a deeply polarized political spectrum. But what if they are simply two wings of the same bird—one that is flying in the same direction no matter how the winds change?

This metaphor reveals a deeper truth about liberalism, whether in its conservative or progressive forms. Despite their surface differences, both wings ultimately serve the same system—a system that prioritizes individualism, capitalism, and state-centric control, often at the expense of community, spirituality, and the environment. For many Indigenous peoples, such as the Navajo, these two versions of liberalism represent not true political choice, but a continuation of colonial domination under different guises.

Shared Foundations: The core of liberalism

Whether conservative or progressive, both wings of liberalism share fundamental assumptions. They both uphold the sanctity of individual rights, a free-market economy, and representative democracy. While these principles might sound like the bedrock of a free and just society, they often work to erode the spiritual, communal, and ecological foundations of Indigenous cultures.

For the Navajo and other Indigenous groups, the land is sacred, community well-being takes precedence over individual gain, and life is understood as deeply interconnected with nature. Liberalism, by contrast, centers around economic growth, materialism, and individual autonomy—values that disconnect people from their land and their traditions. Both conservative and progressive liberalism contribute to the commodification of nature, treating the Earth not as a living entity to be respected, but as a resource to be extracted for profit.

Conservative vs. Progressive: Different speeds, same destination

So, what really sets conservative and progressive liberalism apart? The answer is largely the speed and nature of change. Conservative liberalism favors incremental shifts, pushing for economic growth through traditional industries like resource extraction and market deregulation, often under the guise of preserving national interests. Progressive liberalism, on the other hand, advocates for rapid social reforms—whether that’s advancing civil rights, promoting environmental protections, or embracing globalism.

But at their core, both sides operate within the same capitalist framework. Conservative liberalism might slow down cultural erosion by resisting radical change, but it still promotes the exploitation of Indigenous lands and resources for profit. Meanwhile, progressive liberalism accelerates cultural assimilation, often promoting policies that, while framed as inclusionary, dilute Indigenous sovereignty and identity in the name of "universal human rights" or "progress."

This isn’t a matter of left vs. right—it’s a matter of a system that values profits and individual success over communal well-being, sustainability, and respect for the sacred.

The bird in comparison: Liberalism and the Chinese Communist Party

This two-winged dynamic can be compared to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which also has its own internal factions but remains committed to preserving the power and control of the one-party state. In China, there are pragmatists who focus on economic growth through market reforms, and hardliners who emphasize strict ideological control. These factions may seem to oppose each other, but they both operate within the same authoritarian system, just as conservative and progressive liberalism operate within the same liberal framework.

In both cases, whether in the liberal democracies of the West or the communist regime of China, different factions or wings give the illusion of choice, while ultimately maintaining the same underlying power structures. Just as the CCP balances its different wings to prevent challenges to its dominance, liberal democracies use their conservative and progressive wings to sustain capitalism and the state’s control.

For Indigenous peoples, this distinction is crucial. Whether dealing with liberalism or communism, the result is often the same: domination, resource extraction, and the marginalization of alternative worldviews. The Navajo, for example, have faced the imposition of both liberal and capitalist policies that exploit their lands and undermine their sovereignty. The differences between conservative and progressive liberalism, or between the CCP’s pragmatists and hardliners, become largely irrelevant when the underlying system remains unchanged.

Two Wings, one purpose: Control and exploitation

For those who value Indigenous wisdom—wisdom that emphasizes communal well-being, spiritual interconnectedness, and harmony with nature—neither conservative nor progressive liberalism offers a real alternative. Both serve to perpetuate a system that alienates humans from the Earth and from each other, prioritizing economic growth and individual rights over ecological and social harmony.

Both wings of liberalism, like the factions of the CCP, serve a singular purpose: to maintain control, prevent serious challenges to the system, and protect the interests of the elite. Whether it's through economic deregulation and nationalism or progressive policies that promote globalism and cultural change, the end result is the same: a world where profit, power, and state control take precedence over the well-being of communities, ecosystems, and spiritual traditions.

Conclusion: Seeing beyond the illusion of choice

It’s time to recognize that the differences between conservative and progressive liberalism are, in many ways, superficial. They are two wings of the same bird, flying in the same direction—toward the continued commodification of nature, the erosion of communal values, and the marginalization of spiritual traditions that don’t fit neatly into the liberal, capitalist framework. Indigenous perspectives, like those of the Navajo, reveal this illusion for what it is, pointing to a deeper truth: true freedom and harmony lie not in liberalism, but in a worldview that respects the sacredness of the Earth, values community over the individual, and seeks balance rather than domination.

Only by seeing beyond the wings of liberalism—whether conservative or progressive—can we begin to challenge the structures that have led to so much suffering, exploitation, and alienation. And only then can we work towards a future that honors Indigenous wisdom, protects the Earth, and prioritizes the collective well-being of all.