Theocracy is one of the three pillars of their word, as kossack Shapeshifter points out:
"Aristocrats" makes up one of the three pillars (alongside "theocrats" and "corporatists") in my Republican Party analysis
(1)
Surely no one wants medieval aristocracy back!
I wouldn't be so sure... It was quite a good life for the aristocrats. And their ideological king, Leo Strauss painted the fall of feudalism as the reason for Hitler...
To the Straussians, rationality does not provide an adequate basis for a stable social order. To the contrary, the Age of Enlightenment has ushered in the crisis of modernity, in which nihilism - the moral vacuum left behind by the death of God - inevitably leads to decadence, decline and, ultimately, genocide.
Who Is Leo Strauss and Why Should We Care?
Billmon at Whiskey Bar notes that
Strauss [is the neocons] intellectual capo di tutti capo. (big boss for those who didn't see The Godfather...)
What strikes me most about the Straussians - and by extension, the neocons - is that ... their grand existential struggle isn't with the likes of Teddy Kennedy or even Franklin D. Roosevelt, it's with the liberalism of Voltaire, John Locke and John Stuart Mill... [Strauss] solved the traditional dilemma of old-style conservatives in America: How to win power in a society that has no landed gentry, no nobility, no established church - none of Europe's archaic feudal institutions and loyalties.
A logical leap from Jefferson to Hitler ?
Straussians are moved not only by greed, but also by a distorted view of history that blames rationalism for all the "maladies" - real or imaginary - that the neocons attribute to the 20th century: as Billmon puts it
...That logical leap from Jefferson to Hitler might seem like the intellectual equivalent of Evel Knieval's outlandish ..jump... But it's essential to the Straussian world view - just as it provides the crucial angst that gives neo-conservatism such sharp political edges.
When Newt Gingrich equated feminism with the destruction of Western civ, he was echoing (in his dumbed-down way) Strauss's lurking fear that the liberal American state would steer the same course as the Weimar Republic... [Straussians think that] Deprived of the moral certainty provided by religion and tradition, the masses are vulnerable to crazed political adventurers who would fill the nihilistic void with their own crackpot ideas - like, say, the international conspiracy of Communists and Freemasons.
But why would "serfs" would want to repeal the Enlightenment?
The prospect of "being taken care" by a powerful big boss whom you pledge your undying loyalty has it's appeals for some... Particularly if you think it's the way God wishes it to be or that you are saving the world from the next Hitler... As someone pointed out here at kos yesterday (lost the link) many fundamentalists DO care about torture and poverty, but they expect that their church and Bush's faith based initiatives will take care of the less fortunate (dream on!)
Freedom from doubt, Freedom FROM democracy
They possess the confidence of their militant ignorance, while the rest of us are hobbled by the doubts that are inherent to rationality.
for some, freedom from doubt was always the point, peace of mind worth any price... inside all the vulgar propaganda of fetus murder and racist nightmare was a true project: the repeal of the Enlightenment, the rebuilding of a world where the affirmation of one's own thoughts was a sin, the return of the will to God.
--Greil Marcus, Lipstick Traces: A Secret History of the 20th Century
The death of doubt and dissent
With Strauss we understand why the RICH conservatives abhor rationalism, doubt and dissent: they fear the unknown outcome of those musings by the unwashed masses.. And they want to control the outcomes, hence they CAN'T accept doubt and dissent from underlings...
and that's why Bushco loves theocracy: to keep the masses content and docile...
Religion provides the other part of the puzzle: why the poor are willingly and happily joining the conservative aristocracy: God wants them to, and their reich wing priests tell them God shall not be doubted [Even though God himself left doubt and choice as integral components of men's psyche: even at the Garden of Eden humans were allowed to DOUBT his wisdom on the apple thingy. They were only punished when they acted]
Still doubtfull Conservatives hate Democracy ?
Good! Having doubts means you are not afraid to think! Doubt is a critical component of both democracy and its leadership.
What Is Conservatism and What Is Wrong with It?1 The Main Arguments of Conservatism
From the pharaohs of ancient Egypt to the self-regarding thugs of ancient Rome to the glorified warlords of medieval and absolutist Europe, in nearly every urbanized society throughout human history, there have been people who have tried to constitute themselves as an aristocracy. These people and their allies are the conservatives.
The tactics of conservatism vary widely by place and time. But the most central feature of conservatism is deference: a psychologically internalized attitude on the part of the common people that the aristocracy are better people than they are. Modern-day liberals often theorize that conservatives use "social issues" as a way to mask economic objectives, but this is almost backward: the true goal of conservatism is to establish an aristocracy, which is a social and psychological condition of inequality...
Where does theocracy fits in ?
it is crucial to conservatism that the people must literally love the order that dominates them. Of course this notion sounds bizarre to modern ears, but it is perfectly overt in the writings of leading conservative theorists such as Burke.. People who believe that the aristocracy rightfully dominates society because of its intrinsic superiority are conservatives; democrats, by contrast, believe that they are of equal social worth. Conservatism is the antithesis of democracy. This has been true for thousands of years
Whether it's Christian or Islamic, an uncompromising religious vision can't recognize the legitimacy of democracy without betraying itself. Democracy insists on a pluralism that entertains the possibility that one's religious beliefs might be wrong and another's might be right, and that all religious beliefs may be varying degrees of wrong or right -- what traditionalists despise as "relativism." Almost by definition, democracy is at least a little bit blasphemous. ... Doubt is a critical component of both democracy and its leadership. In the eyes of democracy, doubt is not just moral but necessary.. The Bill of Rights and the First Amendment in particular are monuments to the right to doubt, and to the right of one person to doubt the rightness of 200 million. In contrast, the psychology of theocracy not only denies doubt but views it as a cancer on the congregation, prideful temerity in the face of divine righteousness as it's communicated by God to the leaders of the state.
Surely not here in US! We dumped the king's tea at Boston Harbor, didn't we ?
A main goal in life of all aristocrats.. is to pass on their positions of privilege to their children, and many of the aspiring aristocrats of the United States are appointing their children to positions in government and in the archipelago of think tanks that promote conservative theories.
References: