Conservatism has abdicated its traditional and vital role in requiring debate and introspectioon of progressive ideas.
The traditional role of the conservative movement in the United States has been to put a brake on liberal-progressive proposals and action. At the start of the twentieth century, movements were promoted by liberal activists to grant suffrage to women, control business, regulate various industries (food processors, drug manufacturers), eliminate laws and practices that perpetuated second class citizenship for blacks and the introduction of other programs that were considered at the time to be “radical. The conservatives constituted a “loyal opposition” and acted to delay implementation of some of these “reforms”. As far as foreign relations are concerned, liberals pushed for intervention in the then European conflict in the late 1930’s through 1941. Conservatives were, for the most part, isolationists, holding that involvement in foreign wars was not in our best interest. (The arguments for and against intervention were rendered irrelevant when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and Germany declared war on the United States one day later.)
The conservative right has given up its core principles.
Where the older conservatives preached fiscal responsibility and accused liberals of being profligate, the present administration has thrown fiscal responsibility to the waste heap! Liberals are branded with the slogan, “tax and spend” but conservatives now support the notion of “spend and don’t tax”. Where conservatives were, traditionally, the movement that supported isolationist policies, we now see a Republican administration engaging in “preemptive war”.
In the first part of this essay, I posit that current Republican-conservatism has lost whatever relevancy it on e enjoyed. It’s remaining popularity is due to its continuing to frame issues in such a way that slogans replace principles, sound bites take the place of reason.
Unfortunately, Liberals have allowed this to occur by not forcibly articulating their positions. In the second part of this article, I attempt to state the principles of modern Liberalism, as I understand them and make suggestions on how Liberalism can be better understood and portrayed..
Republicans have re-defined Liberalism to suit their ends.
We live in a world of clichés, sound bites and catch phrases that threaten introspection and intelligent conversation. There are no calm, reasoned debates in our national discourse. Name calling, accusations of venality, spinning of the facts, yes, but no reasoned debate.
Check out the “talking heads” on any cable discussion show or interview program. The participants, both from the left and from the right, interrupt each other, talk over the others and act boorish. I feel that the worst violators of this rudeness are the Ann Coltures and Bill O’Reillys on the far right but acknowledge that some of the representatives of the extreme left are no better. Moreover, the prevalent spate of negative campaigning is illustrative. Rather than state what the candidate will do or stands for, the opponent is accused of being a slave to “special interests” (whatever that means), or with a secret agenda to raise taxes, increase insurance premiums, double telephone and utility bills and kill puppies and kittens.
In Florida, and elsewhere I am certain, the most damning term that is used against an opponent is that he or she is a (dare I say it?) liberal. It has almost become humorous. One commercial now airing, in support of a congressional candidate for office, couples the name of the opponent with the term “liberal”. Every time. In a 90 second commercial, the “L word” is spoken twenty-two times!
Ask a conservative what the biggest problem in America is today, and the answer is likely to be taxation, a sexualized culture, lack of respect for authority, insufficient church-going or big government running amok. Moreover, the same conservative would state the cause of all of these problems could be summed up in one word: LiberalismBeginning in the early 1990s, Republicans attempted and, to a substantial degree have succeeded, to define “liberalism” in a distorted image. Instead of arguing against liberal beliefs, Republicans have adopted a policy of speaking only in clichés and slogans, bumper sticker stuff: belief in equal rights for all Americans is redefined as “special rights for homosexuals”, a belief in the rights of those accused of crimes is now “soft on crime”, a belief in freedom of religion is portrayed as “hatred of Christians”, and questioning the success or failure of our foreign policy toward Iraq or North Korea is simplified as “cut and run. If one supports providing adequate public services, he or she is a “tax and spend liberal. This has the dual effect of making an opponent a cartoon-like character and, at the same time, avoids addressing difficult issues. Up to now, these views have had an audience,
The far-right brand of Conservatism has failed; everyone knows it and it’s time to expose its failures.
The overwhelming majority of the American public now sees the Bush administration and the far right agenda as a failure. They failed in Iraq, they failed after Hurricane Katrina, they failed on health care, they failed to deliver rising wages, they failed on the deficit, they failed, they failed, they failed. Why?. As Alan Wolfe explained in a recent Washington Monthly article, “Conservatives cannot govern well for the same reason that vegetarians cannot prepare a world-class boeuf bourguignon: If you believe that what you are called upon to do is wrong, you are not likely to do it very well.” Ronald Reagan’s assertion that government was not the solution, but was the problem is more than a facile slogan; it explains the inability of many conservatives to govern.
Conservatives had their chance: a Republican president, a Republican Congress, Republican-appointed courts-in short, the perfect environment for enacting their vision with little to stand in their way-and they failed.
Republican-conservatism is the ideology of the past, hypocritical, impotent and reduced to name-calling.
Conservatism is the ideology of the past-a past to which we don’t want to return. Conservatives supported slavery, opposed women’s suffrage, supported Jim Crow, opposed the 40-hour work week and the abolishment of child labor. Conservatives supported McCarthyism and the witch hunts of the 1920’s and 1940’s and 1950’s. In short, all the major advancements of freedom and justice in our history were pushed by liberals and opposed by conservatives, no matter the party they inhabited at the time.
Conservatism is Bill Bennett lecturing about self-denial, then rushing off to feed his slot habit at the casino. It’s James Dobson telling you that children need regular beatings to stay in line. It’s Jerry Falwell watching “Teletubbies” frame by frame to see if Tinky Winky is trying to turn him gay. It is the Reverend Mr. Farwell suggesting hurricanes and earthquakes are the result of, to him, immoral behavior. Conservatism is the Hillsborough county Board of Commissioners in Tampa spending money to research and enact laws to require strippers to be licensed (where would they carry the license?). Conservatism is everyone you never wanted to grow up to be.
Modern conservatism is Representative Foley writing suggestive e-mail to congressional pages while heading committees to protect children from predators. It is favoritism to the rich and powerful, to cronies. It is awarding Halliburton non-bid contracts to supply our armed forces with fuel and food, and allowing that vendor to reap obscene profits. It is supporting tax policies that shield the wealthiest of our population from paying its fair of taxes, therefore shifting the burden to the poor and middle classes. It is reducing research funds to cure disease while providing expensive perks for the wealthiest of members of the Executive and Legislative branches of government.
The right-wing insists on an activist interfering government
Republican-conservatives assert that they believe in a limited government. As I cited before, Reagan’s often expressed mantra that government is the problem, not a solution. This facile statement, however, hides the truth that Conservatives support an activist government, on all levels, to promote and enforce their own prejudices and beliefs.
For example, Conservatives continue to support and enact legislation to reverse the Supreme Court’s permitting abortion, with some limitations. Conservatives oppose making condoms available to teens, on the unproven and absurd theory that, if teens do not have birth control available, they will suddenly become sexually inactive.
Conservatives spend million of dollars nation-wide to restrict and control personal behavior of adults. Do adult establishments, strip clubs, and the like really tear the fabric of society so that their existence must be the object of police activity and enforcement. Surely the police have far more serious crimes upon which to focus than whether an adult gets a “lap dance”.
Republican-conservatives give lip service to the idea that people should be free of governmental interference, but then the Shiavo case comes along and religious views direct governmental policies.
Republican conservatives, a group that used to practice fiscal restraint, have run up the largest deficit in United States history and, still, press for tax reduction for the wealthy.
And the examples can go on and on. . .
In the second part of this article, I suggest that most people believe in liberal principles but that these principles have not been sufficiently articulated.
