Fascism makes strange bedfellows. Nazi German fascism brought capitalists and communists together in WWII. Now it appears that an incipient Neocon American fascism may start bringing together liberals and conservatives. Delaware Dem's
Conservative diary highlights the growing criticism of BushCo in conservative blogs. One thing I found interesting in the citation was the
positive use of the term "liberalism." This could signal the beginning of a watershed event as important as the capitalist/communist alliance.
Granted, such conservatives aren't embracing liberal positions, but some recognize the legitimacy of liberal concerns, the importance of our criticisms, and, perhaps implicitly, the need to form a tactical alliance to counter BushCo's economic and foreign policies, his embrace of torture, and his PR campaign of smears, lies, and propaganda. I will call such conservatives "liberal conservative," if only to signal their willingness to embrace an old but core notion of "liberalism": the belief in liberty.
In parallel fashion, I think we need to consider dimensions of "conservative liberal." (more below)
Again, it's
not a question of embracing conservative positions (I actually consider myself a left/radical/liberal or radical liberal leftist), but rather of connecting to a broader notion of "conservative," if only for the tactical purpose of allying with liberal conservatives to stop BushCo. There are probably many ways of articulating what "conservative liberal" might entail; I will focus on one I think we have actually been practicing for some time.
I refer to the implicit, and at times very explicit, rhetoric of
conserving that left/liberal/radical folks have been using for well over a decade, ie, the rhetoric of striving to conserve those things we feel, indeed know, are threatened: the Bill of Rights, the Geneva Convention, Social Security, environmental laws, labor protection, consumer laws, and, for some at least, some notion of revolution.
Arguably, one reason we have been ineffective in connecting to more people is that we like to position ourselves as "progressives," the "party of change," and/or "revolutionaries," and yet these images run counter to our very important efforts to conserve the things we value. We say "progress" but are actually often trying to block the right's changes.
At the same time, the right has, since Reagan and especially since the fall of the Soviet Union, adopted the rhetoric of change (recall Newt's "Republican revolution"), and used it successfully to package the rollback of social programs, a "return to values," and curtailments of civil liberties. They say "progress" but move backwards.
To return to my main point: I'm interested in other possibilities of thinking about "conservative liberal" to help facilitate a tactical alliance with "liberal conservative" folks in order to stop BushCo before it neoconsolidates itself further in the US and abroad.
PropaGannon, the Iraq War, trickle-down torture, strong-arm tactics against foreign and domestic critics--all of these are issues around which such an alliance could form, but we also need to encourage conservatives to rethink "liberal" while also imagining our own "conservative" dimensions.