Insight into Conservatism

There are a lot of good people out there who consider themselves conservatives. I hold nothing against them. In fact, I look upon them as innocent victims who need to be liberated. The guilt lies at the feet of those who use conservatism as a tool to enslave minds for their own profit and power, and will say anything to achieve their not so hidden aims. It is for the rest of us to rescue the others using truth, compassion and reason, just as founders wished.
    As I continue my study of conservatism, I am more convinced than ever that it is a cultural remnant from a Dark Age time previous to the Age of Reason.
    Although the philosophical and scientific achievements of the Enlightenment transformed European culture and produced the revolutionary ideas that the democratic republic of the United States was based on, it did not necessarily liberate every person at the time. Those untouched by the potential of free thought and the revelations of discovery were probably many. No doubt, some viewed it as an unexpected threat to their way of life. This would certainly not be unusual for the medieval mindset from which it sprang, where truth was considered a limited gift from the ancients that was learned but never doubted. While Galileo, John Lock, Voltaire and so many others challenged the world with new insight, the rural peasants and uneducated masses remained largely disconnected from this cultural movement. They comfortably clung to tradition and superstition for their mainstay of knowledge. As Madison and Jefferson extolled equality, freedom and the use of reason, and fought to separate church from state, there were others who continued to believe in witchcraft and that slavery was part of God's plan.
    I believe that a strain of this failure to buy into Enlightenment thought remains with us today. Radical conservatives are basically traditionalists who view change, free thought, critical analysis, and the interference of science as existentially threatening to the unchallenged stasis that they prefer. Their rejection of modernity is a defensive response, an imperative that necessarily places them in a strange and even precarious relationship to truth. Such resistance to change and to seeing the world as it really is, rather than shaped by their prejudices becomes a matter of life itself. (Please note, I use the word prejudice here in its generalized sense, while acknowledging its relationship to specific forms as well.) Hence the intense anger based on irrational fears. Hence the tendency to believe in conspiracy theories, and nonsensical statements delivered proudly, and even outright lies. To them, nothing is more important than preserving their prejudices intact. Their perceptions of the world depend on that. I truly believe that this is the cultural basis of radical conservatism as we encounter it today — very different from the responsible government conservatism of Barry Goldwater.
    Progressives see these tendencies as an affront to truth that is difficult or even impossible to understand. Since progressives see the world from a completely different perspective, constructively conversing with conservatives becomes very difficult, and reasonable negotiations often impossible. While reason tries to negotiate and build consensus, conservatism responds by building ideological walls of defense and hurling perpetual attacks. To conservatives, progressives are simply the enemy and are treated as such by their political strategies and unceasing propaganda. They see this clash of ideologies as war, and they are fighting tooth and nail for their encounter with reality as they know it. In response, liberals scratch their heads in bewilderment, wondering what their problem could possibly be.
    Here is a small illustration of what we are dealing with: A liberal progressive understands and honors the patriotic symbolism of the American flag and the ideals that it represents. He cherishes the flag, as well he should.
    The conservative sees it differently, which illustrates their fundamental difference. To the conservative, the flag is not a symbol, but almost an idol that confers a significant portion of their identity. It is almost a thing to be worshipped. Desecration of the flag, even in the name of free speech, is treated as blasphemy and is worthy of severe punishment. Conservatives instinctively understand this because reverence for tradition is what defines them — tradition dating back not to our founders, but to medieval Europe. When they say they are proud to be American, they are stating that their personal pride and well-being comes not from who they are or the ideals they try to follow, but from belonging to a particular group that must remain inviolate.
    Note how the Republican Party has long had problems with diversity. This also stems back to medieval times. Like people of the 13th century, they prefer the security that comes from homogeneity, especially one that incorporates hierarchy based on inequality. Medieval society had its king, its aristocracy, its soldiers. It also had its laboring peasants, who were expected to work and comply and not ask questions. Tradition was the basis for all this. It gave a sense of order. They had prescribed values of social and quasi-religious origins, but they were treated as values carved in stone, and not conducive to the changing world that arose in the late 1600s. It was no coincidence that Galileo went on trial for his life.
    Think about it. Torture was okay in the Dark Ages, just as it was in the Bush administration, as Dick Cheney never fails to remind us. Despite all the patriotic posturing, conservatives easily throw American ideals out the window over any perceived threat or political advantage, and return to their medieval vision of the world. Just as the Inquisition once seemed a reasonable response to eliminate those who thought differently than they did, and perpetually led to disaster, they regard torturing terrorists in the name of securing bad information is considered fine, even though it serves the enemy as a recruitment tool. Results don't matter. Adhering to ideology is far more important.
    How about the Religious Right? Unquestioned religious faith is second nature to most conservatives, reflective of a follower mentality. Likewise, crusade-like comitments are seen as moral necessities, no matter how much trouble they cause.
    This relentlessly aggressive posture gives conservatives the capacity to sustain beliefs even after they are proven false. They are not interested in the proof of global warming, which the rest of the world willing admits. They can just deny it as a liberal conspiracy. Denying truth, however, is only half a step away from telling lies, which they easily justify. It's okay to re-write history and promote false scandals. If liberals do the same in response, conservatives know that they have won because both sides are playing by their rules.
    Liberals and moderates come to realize that it is impossible to reason with such fanaticism. If conservatives caould justify slavery, as they did in the past, if they can block civil rights for homosexuals, as they do today, they can easily support anything that is un-American. Healthcare reform becomes a communist plot. Gay people want to destroy marriage as part of an agenda to destroy everything. The census will be used to herd conservatives into concentration camps. When they decided that Barack Obama was born in Kenya, no amount of proof or simple logic could prove otherwise. What is worse, conservatives who know better remain silent, surreptitiously validating and thus promoting these lies.
    Truth and morality are expendable to the conservative movement. As Timothy McVeigh proved, they are not only willing to lie, cheat and steal to preserve their traditional mindset, they are willing to kill as well. Facing a world of change is something that appears to threaten their very existence. What they fail to realize is that the world is always changing and will continue to change. The stasis they prefer only leaves them behind. They are like Islamic fundamentalists, refusing to embrace the modern world, and causing a lot of trouble in their wake.
    If one examines the history of conservatism, none of this will come as a surprise. Make no mistake about it. Edmund Burke, the father of modern conservatism, wrote in defense of England's aristocracy and strict class structure, even as America was rejecting both in exchange for freedom.
    The "liberal democracy" that George Washington sought to protect from regional prejudices in his Farewell Address had nothing to do with conservatism.
    Thomas Jefferson was a liberal extremist who even supported the French Revolution.
    He and James Madison fought for separation of church and state.
    Gouverneur Morris, one of the main authors of the Constitution, warned about what today comprises the mainstay of conservative strategy. To quote his words directly:

“We should remember that the people never act from reason alone. The rich will take advantage of their passions and make these the instruments of oppressing them.”

and again:

"If you stimulate the irrational forces in people, those who seek control over them are readily able to do so. Democracy becomes a farce based not on reason, but on lies and paranoia."

Edmund Burke would agree with him, but not as a warning. Indeed, he liked the idea. He once referred to average conservative as "cattle."
    The purpose of the United States Constitution was to form a stronger central government because the Articles of Confederation failed. This is why conservatives constantly obsess about two or three amendments to their liking, and ignore such things as the responsibility of Congress to see to the welfare of the people.
    The myth of conservatism that they represent as American ideals is nothing more than a scam. Liberals have to understand this if they ever hope to effectively contend with it, without sinking to their level. They say they champion the middle class, when it was FDR's New Deal that created the middle class, and conservatives would like nothing better than to end it. Before the New Deal, 60% of the American population was in poverty, and most people never saw a doctor in their lives. Is that what they really want us to return to? In fact, yes! At least on the surface. That's the trouble with conservatism. Their goals are detached from reality. They would hate living in the world that they are trying to build. The equal rights that they would deny others protects them as well.
    The American people have to learn what conservatism is really all about, and not fall for all the rhetoric of professional propagandists.
    Rush Limbaugh's power comes from talking fast, rejecting nuance, making believe he has all the answers and demanding that all liberals fit into his definition of the enemy. Glen Beck does the same thing in different, almost spooky ways. Just about all conservative commentators appeal to the darker side of human nature, where fears of the boogeyman still haunt Dark Age ignorance. In regards to truth, their efforts at deception are unconscionable, but sadly effective. They know that the average conservative is receptive to their mob mentality provocations. It is one of the reasons that many of our founders, including John Adams, feared democracy as unleashing a demon that would destroy us all.
    In an ideal world, the tension between liberalism and conservatism would be replaced by a positive, symbiotic partnership. The role of conservatism would be to protect what is best in our traditions, and help it evolved according to the needs of the times. Liberalism would also be given its due, allowing freedom to flourish through the amalgamation of reason and compassion. The best scenario would be a balance of liberalism and conservatism in each person. We actually see something like this in most liberals and moderates. But that is not the conservative way. THey want ideological purity and we are suffering the consequences.
    What can we do to change things? We can learn the true benefits of liberalism, by which I mean Americanism, and effectively answer conservative charges. We can excite the American people by resurrecting their own ideals, against which conservatism's negativity fades into shadow.
    Truth can win out in this contest, but only if we wield it unceasingly as a weapon against ignorance.

Return