Wingnuttery in Extremis
Every once in a while a bottle of bourbon ends up in the wrong hands at the wrong time and you end up with a wingnut post that makes all other wingnut posts look like they were written by Ryan S in the chilled out afterglow of a dry hump with a born again RNC intern. During those special times, it is fitting to honor the wingnuttery in extremis post with a line by line analyisis. Now is such a time. David Anderson has put up such a post. Let’s begin and I hope you have a strong stomach.
There is a movement sweeping the world. It is one based individual dignity, freedom of the marketplace, innovation of ideas, piety, and family. It is about advancing the best of human race, yet it is the most understood movement in the world.
Yeah..BOYZZZ….a typo in the first line that undermines the whole thing. You know he meant to say that conservatism is MISunderstood, but what the hey. The whole point of a wingnut creedo is to be misunderstood so you can continue to nuture the gripe. Am I right? And what better way to be misunderstood than to throw a typo into the first sentence.
Part of the confusion is due to the fact that conservatism is such a popular label. Racists, sexists, tyrants, and others have tried to claim its banner as their own. To a degree, you have to ask what are you trying to conserve? Such confusion has emerged that someone needs to take up the banner of defining for the people today’s conservative movement. I hope this will inspire someone to do so.
Okay. I have no idea what he is saying here, but I think it has something to do with the fact that “conservatism” contains the word “conserve” let’s read on and see wuz up wit dat?
In the past conservatives have been thought of as preferring institutions over the individual. Yet modern conservatism is as much about conserving the 18th century liberal values of individualism. We are conservative in the use of government. This is not some reflex reaction. Limited government is a core value because we understand that the degree to which government intrudes into an area is the degree individual sovereignty is compromised. We believe government power not only comes from the consent of the governed, but is the collective expression of individual rights of self defense.
In other words, “I learned a whole lot of words in college. Here are some of them …sovereignty…consent…collective…aint I smart?”
The government is charged with protecting people from the illegitimate use of force. You have a right to your life, liberty, and property. This is regardless of strength, wealth, or influence whether you are pre-born or aged or whether you are in a minority position in society or a majority. The first job of government is to prevent those who would take those rights from you whether a foreign or domestic source. No one even the government can take those rights from you without cause.
This is great. As I read this I feel like I am a space ship re-entering earth’s atmosphere after the pure vaccum of the thought in the fist couple of sentences. Now we are getting warm. I have hope that there is going to be a point to this after all.
Modern conservatives would say the next job of government is providing an infrastructure for the advancement of its people. Patents encourage innovation. Copyrights protect intellectual property (though recent changes are abusing this). Roads and frequency spectrum facilitate commerce. Education facilitates a citizenry which can prosper and govern itself.
Oh snap…! Did he just say conservatives want to create and “infrastructure?” I know some people in Minneapolis who would beg to differ.
Modern conservatism rejects bigotry as inconsistent with individual rights. If all individuals are equal, why would we have government banning some from participating in the marketplace? Why should some not have equal justice in the courts? Modern conservatives know that once you accept the demise of some one’s rights, you sow the seeds of undermining every one’s rights.
Uh…here is the thing about the poor “particpating” versus the rich “taking part” in the market place. The marketplace is like a bacon and egg breakfast. The chicken “takes part” in creating the breakfast and the pig “participates.”
Modern conservatives tend to distrust concentrations of power. The movement has expressed this with its anti-monopoly business policies; the rise of the evangelical movement in the Christian Church, which distrusts big religion; the call for deregulation and hands off by government; the effort for school choice, and the get back to family over the village movement.
We are talking about conservatives right? I’m losing the thread. Okay, I’m skipping some shit because this is just too damn boring.
Modern conservatives value science as a great tool but distrust it as a governor of our values. We believe science should be subject to values. Human cloning, human hybrids, genetic manipulation, human experimentation, and other controversies in science are addressed from how effect human dignity.
Modern conservatives want a government which is honest, efficient, fiscally responsible, and limited in scope. Why? Government like any other enterprise works best when it is on purpose. If government is trying to substitute for family, church, charity, and run businesses, it will not be governing. This will cause havoc and universal distress.
Why didn’t he just say, “Modern conservatives do not value science.” ? He could have saved about 30 words.
When looked at in this light, it is easy to see why this new century will become the conservative century. It is easy to say, “I am proud to be a modern conservative”. I hope this philosophical discussion inspires a vibrant exchange of vision.
I wish I could exchange my vision right now, but I am blinded by the stupidity. Like a mason jar full of grain I hope it wears off by tomorrow.
You are funny. You just don’t have the courage to admit the truth. The modern conservative movement is on the assent worldwide.
“Why didn’t he just say, “Modern conservatives does not value science.” ? He could have saved about 30 words.”
Probably, because that was not what he was saying. It was a complex view of science. You often have difficulty with complex ideas. No shame in that….
It is kind of funny that Jason ridiculed the post without offering one argument against it.
I thought the premise of the post, that conservatism is a force for good in the world, was so wrong on a prima facia basis that I did not bother with it.
“Uh…here is the thing about the poor “particpating” versus the rich “taking part” in the market place. The marketplace is like a bacon and egg breakfast. The chicken “takes part” in creating the breakfast and the pig “participates.”
Priceless Jason!
R,
That was directly from my studies of Marx. I wish I could take credit but Groucho had a big impact on me.
“Limited government is a core value because we understand that the degree to which government intrudes into an area is the degree individual sovereignty is compromised.”
I can translate this for you: “We believe it’s important to divest the government of its ability to work effectively for three reasons. One, we can turn the savings into tax cuts for ourselves. Two, an ineffective government will dis-enable it to intrude into the ways we exploit others through poor wages and unsafe work conditions (e.g., coal mines) thereby increasing our profits. Three, we really don’t care about increasing individual liberty for everyone at all. We want the government to back so that the private sector can then deprive people of their liberties at their jobs through prescribed codes of conduct before & after work, limiting free speech (even after-work free speech), and making workers work longer hours, which means that while on the job they will have virtually no civil rights at all. But the business owners & rich elites will have plenty of civil rights because they own the businesses that control the workers.”
“Modern conservatism rejects bigotry as inconsistent with individual rights.”
This is important. Conservatives reject bigotry, but not discrimination because discrimination in hiring & firing practices, in access to education (especially private education), are functions of liberty. That’s why Barry Goldwater hated bigotry (he sincerely hated it), but opposed civil rights legislation that affected the marketplace. He had the gaga mystical idea that the free market would magically eliminate discrimination.
The American modern conservative movement
is not exactly part of the conservative thinking in the rest of the world.
And if I can extend Jason’s thought on Modern Conservatives not valuing science — you can tell that because Mr. Anderson has to resort to making up a bunch of crap in order to pretend to some principles. Principles, of course, that have nothing to do with science, but everything to do with articles of faith that they wish that science would support.
Ground zero of the values held by most folks (who are not part of the modern conservative movement) are the Ten Commandments and the NT admonition to Love they neighbor as thyself. There is nothing in science that gets in the way of these or its derivatives.
The controversies he points to are controversies made up by and used by wingnuts to fund raise on more ginned up fear. And human experimentation? That’s been around for as long as people have been testing new drugs and medical procedures. You don’t know how it works in humans til you test it on humans.
“In the past conservatives have been thought of as preferring institutions over the individual.”
They still prefer institutions over individuals — witness the wholesale transfer of taxpayer funds to their friends in the war-profiteering, energy profiteering, and medical profiteering businesses.
And, of course, since 9/11 we all need to accommodate ourselves to the fact that we are all targets of suspicion so the government can expand its powers (and its size) to gather up who knows what data on us. Without a warrant or court oversight.
“One, we can turn the savings into tax cuts for ourselves. Two, an ineffective government will dis-enable it to intrude into the ways we exploit others through poor wages and unsafe work conditions (e.g., coal mines) thereby increasing our profits. Three, we really don’t care about increasing individual liberty for everyone at all. ”
Sounds to me that Dana is a proponent of the “cradle to grave” mentality. Can’t fend for yourself or something?
Government should protect the borders, infrastructure, and BASIC human rights. Otherwise it should shut and stay out of things. What happened to the days when the members of congress had regualar jobs and for just a few days a year, venture to DC to quickly dispatch with the business of the country. Now it is a full time job. State legislatures used to meet even less. Now they are becoming full time jobs!
ENOUGH. Stick to the basics and stop creating a HUGE nanny state. We are Americans for gosh sake. This country was built on individual spirit, not living strictly at the pleasure of the king.
“What happened to the days when the members of congress had regualar jobs and for just a few days a year, venture to DC to quickly dispatch with the business of the country”
The world changed and the USA Congress realized that it no longer lived in the 18th century. Apparently, you are the last person in the USA to find out.
Chris meant to say stop creating a HUGE nanny state that provides an occasional benefit to people – but leave the corporate nanny state in place.
But you have to admit the coonskin caps were pretty cool.
Dana you sound like Obama, and Hil Clinton. You can’t make it on your own. You need us. Really.
“Chris meant to say stop creating a HUGE nanny state that provides an occasional benefit to people – but leave the corporate nanny state in place.”
Obviously did not read my post on another thread. I have stated before that corporate welfare is not a job of government either. I would pull the plug on that waste of money also.
Funny how the preface is that Conservatism is on the rise. Too bad that assessment flies in the face of all of the recent polls asking what party holds the voters particular ideals and which one votes, old and young, are identifying with….
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200708/CUL20070802a.html
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/6/26/23587/3754
When the preface is incorrect then you can be pretty well certain that the conclusions are as too…
The evidence about the modern conservative movement sweeping the world is the fact that in culture, politics, and religion modern conservatives are gaining influence worldwide.
Look at the new leadership in Canada, Germany, France, S. Korea, Malawa, Mongolia, Mexico, Czech Republic, Ukraine, Poland, Nigeria, the new LDP in Japan, and many other nations. The major opposition in many other countries has been supplanted by modern conservatives such as in Israel, Chillie, Russian reformers, Italy, Argentina, South Africa, Thailand, and Belarus to name a few. I am amazed you missed it.
I love studying other nations’ elections. It gives me a better view of the world. Americans in general are too insular (I am not judging you as I do not know you). We act as if we can learn very little from the rest of the world. The truth is we can gain much insight into ourselves from others. I am pleased we see the march of freedom around the world. May the flame never die.
Poll numbers ebb and flow and so do elections, but even with the incompetence of Katrina relief and a mismanaged war, the attitude of the people has not shifted significantly just their trust in the current leadership.
BTW I am Pentacostal. I don’t touch Burbon or any acoholic drinks. I can do this sober. Scary isn’t it. 🙂
My, my…..you’re beginning to sound like a true Democrat……
“ We act as if we can learn very little from the rest of the world. The truth is we can gain much insight into ourselves from others”
I was told there was a shredding of David’s ideas over here. Can someone point it out to me, ’cause I don’t see it?