What does it mean to do the same thing over and over and expect different outcomes? It means being a conservative. Across history and across cultures, conservatism always winds up in the same place: violence, xenophobia, cultural division, inequality, societal breakdown, oligarchy, kleptocracy, eroding values, subjugation of truth, concentration of power.
Pick a society or culture, conservatism always serves the interests of a few at the expense of the general populace, always betrays the people in favor of the powerful. By being a force to preserve the past, conservatism may sound benign and high-minded — tradition, values, merit. The questions to always be asked, however, are these:
Whose tradition?
What values?
How is merit to be defined?
For the issue of conservatism is always the same: someone is in the position of choosing these things, excluding others — conservatism is, ironically but not, elitist. Conservatism purports to favor the marketplace of ideas, a sort of intellectual capitalism, but as in all forms of capitalism favored by conservatives they try to rig the game. Exclude certain voters, limit rights, control media — because conservatism’s principle is for a powerful few to select certain deserving ideas over undeserving ideas.
As a backward-looking movement, conservatism chooses what tradition, what values, what merit matters. Orwell’s observation that who controls the past controls the future identifies the ultimate conservative notion. MY version of tradition, MY version of values, MY version of merit, claiming universality for values that are strictly sectarian.
That is the fundamental of conservatism — to decide what and who deserve to thrive, and to exclude (or worse) the underserving. Fundamentalist religions determine who believes the right things and determine what the right things are, condemning all alternatives. Fiscal conservatives aren’t interested in limiting spending, only in the power to select where the money is spent, excluding things they don’t like. Social conservatives don’t condemn all perverse behaviors, only the ones they get to choose as perverse.
For conservatives, the principle issue is to choose who is deserving. If some are, then some are not, as simple as that.
Traditional definitions of “right” and “left” make those loaded terms: communism is “leftist”, so Soviet Russia and Red China are said to be leftist. However, those societies were and are fundamentally conservative — the “leftist” communism became the banner waved to preserve the extreme conservatism of the powerful elites. US conservatives like to focus on the communist label, assign it to liberals everywhere, when what they mean is the despotic conservative governments of the USSR, the PRC, DPRK, the old Warsaw Pact, and others. Those are perfect examples of conservatism — the label doesn’t describe the contents.
The real question is always: who gets to choose who is “deserving”. In conservative systems, important questions are “Who is Christian enough?”, “Who is Communist enough?”, “Who is American enough?”...who is in the club and who is not? “Who is wealthy enough?” has become a question in the US, an inversion of the question “If you’re so smart, why ain’t you rich?” — “I am rich, therefore, I am smart and deserving”.
In conservative worlds, the burden of being undeserving is dealt with cruelly, betraying the lies of whatever underlying values are claimed by the deserving. So-called Christians demand cruelty for immigrants, prisoners, poor people, dark people, Muslim people, sick people, disabled people, anyone they can label as “undeserving” of the blessings of liberty, undeserving of the blessings of Christ’s teaching: Blessed are the meek, the poor, said Jesus. “That which you do the the least among us, that also you do to me”, admonished the Son of God.
These anachronisms are called out as hypocrisy, but hypocrisy misses the point. It’s not hypocritical, it’s conservative — that is what conservatism does, it’s what conservatism has always done.
Conservatism rises and always falls. It rises on the populism of inclusion in the club, the power to choose who is deserving and undeserving. It is always corrupt, because it always depends on a rigged game. If a conservative is decrying a rigged game, it is because they either didn’t get to do the rigging or they are playing their subjects’ fears of being victims of getting rigged out of what they think they deserve.
The assertions of conservatism always depend on fallacy:
- Ad hominem — abuse of the opponent.
- Ad baculum — might makes right, the wealthy are the job creators, the backbone of America
- Ad populum — “The American people demand...”, “everyone is saying I deserve the Nobel Prize”
- Ignoratio elenchii — Bill Clinton had an affair. Liberals lack morality.
- Fallacy of accident — what was true in one case proves a generalization. One immigrant in one place is accused of murder, therefore immigrants are murderers and immigration is a threat to society.
- Fallacy of converse accident — putting even limited gun laws in place will lead to all guns being confiscated.
(From reader libre nos)
- Appeal to authority: The Bible says … the Founders … original interpretation … Adam Smith. WTF, even Laffer.
- Appeal to antiquity: “We've always done it this way.” “Surely , if there was something wrong we would have fixed it by now.”
- Circular reasoning: The unrestricted free market is the best economic system, because it works better than any other system in a republic, which is the best political system, because it’s compatible with the unrestricted free market.
- Petitio principii (begging the question, unjustified assumptions): Conservative social values are best, because they’re based on a strong nuclear family with well-defined gender roles.
What can one say about conservatism when it depends entirely on fallacy?
Conservatism always falls the same way — justice prevails. Justice is the force that resets the term deserving to mean everyone. Conservatism always fights justice the same way — with power exercised by the select few. The only variable is the power applied: money, intimidation, physical force.
Be very clear. Donald Trump is a symptom, not the problem. Neo-Nazis are symptoms, not the problem. Vast inequality is a symptom, not the problem. Voting rights suppression is a symptom, not the problem. Violence against immigrants is a symptom, not the problem. Economy-breaking tax breaks are a symptom, not the problem. Putting a US embassy in Jerusalem and getting protesting Palestinians killed are symptoms, not the problem. Denying Medicaid benefits to poor people is a symptom, not the problem. Good Lord, one can go on and on and on for days. The denials of justice are stacking up like a Jenga game. Like Jenga, conservatism always fails. By denying justice, conservatism is fundamentally unstable. It always pulls blocks from the foundation to benefit the top.
America, hopefully, has come to a point in the conservative Jenga game where enough people know it needs to stop and get dismantled into a more just state. I’ve been thinking of conservatism as a futile struggle against time, gravity and equilibrium, but that’s going over the edge, don’t you think?
Democrats, as liberals, need to frame each individual battle in service of fulfilling America’s mission. Standing up for oppressed constituencies are battles. Every battle must to be fought, in the context of winning the war of justice for all. Justice for some but not all is failure in America’s mission. This is a war that has been underway for America’s history.
Liberalism requires confidence. The Founders knew that and debated the degree of confidence that should be placed in the wisdom of the people. The design of the republic reflects their negotiated means to manage extremes in various directions. The breathtaking courage in the design at the time reflected liberal confidence in the people. Many of the shortcomings in the design descend from failures of confidence, even cowardice on the parts of conservative elements, preserving power structures that betrayed justice.
If liberalism requires confidence, it is also true that conservatism requires cowardice. Liberalism trusts all the people to participate and that wisdom will prevail. Conservatism distrusts, fears futures. Liberalism, ironically, says “Trust, but verify”. Conservatism says, “Fear, so control”.
Hell, conservatives even prefer their own sectarian interpretations of their own (religious, financial or political) Bible over the American Constitution out of fear that the Constitution permits too much for too many underserving sorts.
As liberals, as Democrats, the mission is to restore America on a pathway to a more perfect Union, establishing Justice, insuring domestic Tranquility, providing for the common defense, promoting the general Welfare, and securing the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.
The strategy must be to make sure America knows that ALL those values must be secure for ALL if they are to secure for any. A Union that creeps toward denying voters and setting states against one another is not becoming more perfect. Mistreating sectors of society for racial, religious, sexual orientations, or other reasons is not establishing Justice. Domestic Tranquility is not insured by armed groups prepared to inflict casualties on people. The common defense is not served by betraying allies and provoking killing abroad. The general Welfare is not promoted by denying rights, food, medical care and housing to poorer people while transferring wealth to the wealthy. The Blessings of Liberty are only secured to ourselves AND our Posterity if we have the courage to trust individuals in the expression of their rights and to look forward.
Frankly, conservatives, if the Constitution is not for you, perhaps you should pick a different country.
Democrats — as liberals, we need to stand for Justice, for it makes all the other things possible. Conservatism is the enemy of Justice.
Democrats — For Liberty. For Justice. For ALL.