evilbore thrills to liberal porn: the death of movement conservatism

[Van Cruncheon]

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=9dfd540a-3d44-4684-a333-415ef34efa5b -- a decent article from sam tenenhaus looking at the fundamental hypocrisy of movement conservatives, with a call to return to the burkean/disraelian conservatism of yore that embraced positivity and change while demanding government accountability. it's long!

here's a good section if you don't wanna read the whole thing:

What passes for conservatism today would have been incomprehensible to its originator, Edmund Burke, who, in the late eighteenth century, set forth the principles by which governments might nurture the "organic" unity that bound a people together even in times of revolutionary upheaval. Burke's conservatism was based not on a particular set of ideological principles but rather on distrust of all ideologies. In his most celebrated writings, his denunciation of the French Revolution and its English champions, Burke did not seek to justify the ancien regime and its many inequities. Nor did he propose a counter-ideology. Instead he warned against the destabilizing perils of revolutionary politics, beginning with its totalizing nostrums. Robespierre and Danton, the movement ideologues of their day, were inflamed with the Enlightenment vision of the ideal civilization and sacrificed to its abstractions the established traditions and institutions of what Burke called "civil society." They placed an idea of the perfect society over and above the need to improve society as it really existed.

At the same time, Burke recognized that governments were obligated to use their powers to meliorate intolerable conditions. He had, for example, supported the American Revolution because its architects, unlike the French rebels, had not sought to destroy the English government; on the contrary, they petitioned for just representation within it. Had King George III complied, he would have strengthened, not weakened, the Crown and Parliament. Instead, he had inflexibly clung to the hard line and so shared responsibility for the Americans' revolt. "A state without the means of some change is without the means of its conservation," Burke warned. The task of the statesman was to maintain equilibrium between "[t]he two principles of conservation and correction." Governance was a perpetual act of compromise--"sometimes between good and evil, and sometimes between evil and evil." In such a scheme there is no useful place for the either/or of ideological purism.

The story of postwar American conservatism is best understood as a continual replay of a single long-standing debate. On one side are those who have upheld the Burkean ideal of replenishing civil society by adjusting to changing conditions. On the other are those committed to a revanchist counterrevolution, the restoration of America's pre-welfare state ancien regime. And, time and again, the counterrevolutionaries have won. The result is that modern American conservatism has dedicated itself not to fortifying and replenishing civil society but rather to weakening it through a politics of civil warfare.

How did this happen? One reason is that the most intellectually sophisticated founders of postwar conservatism were in many instances ex-Marxists, who moved from left to right but remained persuaded that they were living in revolutionary times and so retained their absolutist fervor. In place of the Marxist dialectic they formulated a Manichaean politics of good and evil, still with us today, and their strategy was to build a movement based on organizing cultural antagonisms. Many have observed that movement politics most clearly defines itself not by what it yearns to conserve but by what it longs to destroy--"statist" social programs; "socialized medicine"; "big labor"; "activist" Supreme Court justices, the "media elite"; "tenured radicals" on university faculties; "experts" in and out of government.

But, if it's clear what the right is against, what exactly has it been for? This question has haunted the movement from its inception in the 1950s, when its principal objective was to undo the New Deal and reinstate the laissez-faire Republicanism of the 1920s. This backward-looking program mystified one leading conservative. Whittaker Chambers, a repentant ex-communist, had passed through a brief counterrevolutionary phase but then, in his last years, had gravitated toward a genuinely classic conservatism. He distilled his thinking in a remarkable sequence of letters written from the self-imposed exile of his Maryland farm, and sent to a young admirer, William F. Buckley Jr. When their relationship began, Buckley--a self-described "radical conservative"--was assembling the group of thinkers and writers who would form the core of National Review, a journal conceived to contest the "liberal monopolists of 'public opinion.'" Buckley was especially keen to recruit Chambers. But Chambers turned him down. He sympathized with the magazine's opposition to increasingly centralized government, but, in practical terms, he believed challenging it was futile. It was evident that New Deal economics had become the basis for governing in postwar America, and the right had no plausible choice but to accept this fact--not because liberals were all-powerful (as some on the right believed) but rather because what the right called "statism" looked very much like a Burkean "correction."

Chambers witnessed the popular demand for the New Deal firsthand. He raised milch cattle, and his neighbors were farmers. Most were archconservative, even reactionary. They had sent the segregationist Democrat Millard Tydings to the Senate, and then, when Tydings had opposed McCarthy's Red-hunting investigations, they had voted him out of office. They were also sworn enemies of programs like FDR's Agricultural Adjustment Act, which tried to offset the volatility of markets by controlling crop yields and fixing prices. Some had even been indicted for refusing to allow farm officials to inspect their crops. Nonetheless, Chambers observed, his typical neighbor happily accepted federal subsidies. In other words, the farmers wanted it both ways. They wanted the freedom to grow as much as they could, even though it was against their best interests. But they also expected the government to bail them out in difficult times. In sum, "the farmers are signing for a socialist agriculture with their feet."

edmund burke

ronald reagan

[Crushed]

ronald reagan should be removed from all records, his graven image and name stricken from the planet, his grave torn down, and we should salt the earth where he was buried

[TVC15]

http://info.interactivist.net/node/3244

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

It is too soon to tell what will happen with modern conservatism.  It hasn't even been a month, or just a little over three months since Obama got elected.

I think 2010 will be the sink or swim moment for the GOP.

[Van Cruncheon]

yeah, it's definitely way too early, but the schism between the libertarian conservatives (the fear of statism) and the populist conservatives (fear of immigrants and non-Christians) will trash the MOVEMENT. if republicans return to the burkean path, where they reject ideologies like socialism, free market capitalism, and theological transformative politics; and likewise embrace the slow change of modern politics in a measured, demanding way, they can survive -- and they may find a lot of democrats move their way again.

a movement can't survive the participatory presence of two or more polemic ideologies -- it just doesn't make sense. that the breathless libertarians, the regressive populists, and the bible belt theocrats could fuck in the same bed for so long is simply a tribute to their shared fear of socialism/communism (albeit for different reasons).

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

While it is too early, I think the GOP is largely a spent force.  I think it was a spent force in 2006 where after the midterm elections, the GOP has been limping their way along.  The fundie movement is waning, the economic policy has been so horrendous that nobody will think of returning to Reaganomics for a long time, and that the world has been changed from the Bush Doctrine to where an event like Iraq will not happen again for a long time.  Not a whole hell of a lot for the GOP to ride on except the token opposition, which will get their asses handed to them if the Democrat plan works.

I'm not naive enough to think that the GOP will be dead forever but there will be a lot of in-fighting between conservative factions and a lack of strong, Reagan like leadership to bring those factions together.  The party will be down and out for a while.

[recursivelyenumerable]

claiming your ideology is the negation of ideology is a neat trick, if you can get people to buy it.

[Van Cruncheon]

well, the democratic stimulus plan will be a pyrrhic victory at BEST -- even krugman expects the economic recovery (when it comes in sight) to be a rictus of social discomfort -- so the antagonistic "talk radio" right will always be able to eke some sort of negative angle on current politics that will keep the core of their flock galvanized. as with the new deal, the great society, and japan's botched lost decade, they'll find some way to refactor it such that keynesian economics come into doubt, even though keynesian economics are no more their enemy than they are the liberal's friend.

[Van Cruncheon]

claiming your ideology is the negation of ideology is a neat trick, if you can get people to buy it.

it's not negation, though; it's adhering to the current status quo, which is in fact an ideology in the very loosest sense. politics fail only when we embrace binary propositions, anyhow. see: foc, beardo.

[Beardo]

Not to mention that republicans are doody head butt faces.

[Rman]

Both parties can be exasperating, but the GOP just seems out of touch.  They are quick to support two expensive wars and significantly cut taxes for a minority of Americans, and yet upgrading basic American infrastructure and providing states greater aid in education makes them cringe, as evidenced by the recent stimulus package objections.  Are wealthy Americans clamoring for tax cuts?  Their base platform just seems totally contrary to the priorities of most Americans.  Most Americans want more educational funding, less involvements in far away wars, better and more affordable healthcare insurance.  

[Van Cruncheon]

and many URBAN republicans agree. it's the shithead flyover states that care less about education and infrastructure, although they'll gratefully gladhand for farm subsidies. blame the senate's disproportionate representation!

[Rman]

and many URBAN republicans agree. it's the shithead flyover states that care less about education and infrastructure, although they'll gratefully gladhand for farm subsidies. blame the senate's disproportionate representation!

I totally agree with that.  In the urban centers, local republicans run very progressive campaigns and platforms, most are pro education, pro environment and pro choice.

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

I live in a flyover state

[Van Cruncheon]

congratulations on ruining it for the rest of us

[Beardo]

better and more affordable healthcare insurance.  

Should think about getting a real job. rly

[Rman]

I don't know if are aware of rising health care costs, Beardo.  Most contemporary health care coverage pales in comparison to previous incarnations, and employers are increasingly paying more and more per employee per year.

And lol at "real job".  If it is honest labor its real.  What if the single mother working as an office cleaner get injured off the job?  Unless she is insured she sure as hell is not going to be able to afford her medical bills. 

Some people are in transitionary phases, where they are working jobs without any real benefits to afford the basics while they go to school, perhaps part time.  It's not that that cut and dry.

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

Words and logic are wasted on Beardo

[Rman]

Words and logic are wasted on Beardo

I have hope.  If only a glimmer.

[Crushed]

better and more affordable healthcare insurance.  

Should think about getting a real job. rly

beardo do you agree with this cartoon

[Beardo]

If you live in a flood zone and don't have flood insurance you are a dumb ass. Pretty simple really.

[Crushed]

congratulations, you are objectively evil

[Guybrush Threepwood]

and we should salt the earth where he was buried

no need to be redundant

[Beardo]

congratulations, you are objectively evil

You realize that when you buy a house in a flood zone, your realtor is required by law to have you sign a document stating that you live in a flood zone. At least in my state they are.

[Crushed]

you're an evil person

[Beardo]

you're an evil person

Yes i'm evil because I understand what the law is. 

[Eel O'Brian]

as someone who lives in what is pretty much the catcher's mitt of the united states in regards to hurricanes, i'm experiencing inarticulate rage here at beardo's comment

[Van Cruncheon]

If you live in a flood zone and don't have flood insurance you are a dumb ass. Pretty simple really.

never you mind that allstate found countless loopholes to avoid paying ANYTHING to their insured folks in katrina's floodzones

[Eel O'Brian]

this is what i'm saying

[Crushed]

you're an evil person

Yes i'm evil because I understand what the law is. 

you're evil because you look at people in suffering and your response is to laugh in their face because it would hurt you to help them

you are evil

if there is a hell, you are going there, along with all other conservatives

[Beardo]

as someone who lives in what is pretty much the catcher's mitt of the united states in regards to hurricanes, i'm experiencing inarticulate rage here at beardo's comment

Do you have flood insurance?

never you mind that allstate found countless loopholes to avoid paying ANYTHING to their insured folks in katrina's floodzones

I agree with you, but the cartoon was specifically about flood insurance.

you're evil because you look at people in suffering and your response is to laugh in their face because it would hurt you to help them

Am I an insurance company?

[Eel O'Brian]

along with all other conservatives

don't be a beardo

[Van Cruncheon]

so why should people buy flood insurance if it isn't going to pay out for them, or if it's a gamble?

[Beardo]

so why should people buy insurance if it isn't going to pay out for them, or if it's a gamble?

Fixed...

[Eel O'Brian]

so why should people buy flood insurance if it isn't going to pay out for them, or if it's a gamble?

or if there are countless ways for insurance companies to wrangle out of paying you, or if they keep raising their rates to house-payment levels

[TVC15]

If you live in a flood zone and don't have flood insurance you are a dumb ass. Pretty simple really.

never you mind that allstate found countless loopholes to avoid paying ANYTHING to their insured folks in katrina's floodzones

Also, a local example for us western washington peeps.  All that flooding a few weeks back?  The reason there was so much damage was because the FEMA-provided flood maps were hilariously inaccurate.  The people hit didn't even know they were at risk for flooding.

[Beardo]

or if there are countless ways for insurance companies to wrangle out of paying you, or if they keep raising their rates to house-payment levels

Sounds like a shitty insurance company.

Also, a local example for us western washington peeps.  All that flooding a few weeks back?  The reason there was so much damage was because the FEMA-provided flood maps were hilariously inaccurate.  The people hit didn't even know they were at risk for flooding.

FEMA is a pile of shit, film at 11.

[Van Cruncheon]

name a good insurance company that offers comprehensive flood coverage

[Crushed]

beardo, when you see a poor person, do you, like, actually want to kill them

[Eel O'Brian]

hurricane floyd fucked nc up, and large parts of it weren't considered flood zones at the time

my aunt in greenville nc (not a flood zone) lost everything, including all my late uncle's original WWII decorations, her church helped her out

[Van Cruncheon]

no, he would prefer they die of their own agency. he's really only good for pissing on the corpse

[Beardo]

beardo, when you see a poor person, do you, like, actually want to kill them

Yes, poor people suck. I hate poor people. If poor people were any good at life, they wouldnt be poor.

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

Beardo is probably poor himself.  He hates poor people because deep down, he hates himself

[Beardo]

my aunt in greenville nc (not a flood zone) lost everything, including all my late uncle's original WWII decorations, her church helped her out

Something beside the government actually helped a citizen out!!?? Im shocked at this utterly unprecedented revelation.

[Eel O'Brian]

i can't believe i stood up for you when you were moaning about your sick/elderly family member on here, beardo

i may be considered slightly conservative compared to most people here but you are some piece of work, dude

[Van Cruncheon]

beardo isn't conservative. he's lolbertarian

[Beardo]

Look, I wish we lived in some kind of fantasy land where everyone could get $2 insurance that covered everything that ever happened to you, but that just isnt how the world works.

[Crushed]

Beardo may be poor, but he believes he will be in the Top 1% as soon as his movie ideas, "Kung Fu Honky" and "Prisoner of Planet Fuck" are greenlit.

He's afraid of sociaislam taking away his hypothetical golden pogo stick bought with his hypothetical money.

[Van Cruncheon]

beardo: who is asking for that, you gobsmacked manchild

[Eel O'Brian]

hell, i dunno what i am on the political spectrum, really

i see crooks everywhere

[Crushed]

The "political spectrum" is such a flawed high school-level approximation that leads to so many idiotic simplifications. It leads to false equivalences, and is prone to being shifted around so much that the "center" can be directly on your position, allowing you to label a moderate opinion as "extreme."

[ToxicAdam]

I'm going to label you and call you names. neener neener

[Eel O'Brian]

huh

well, i guess that's what i get for sticking my nose in political threads

bewilderment, and a sense of sorrow for the time i could've spent playing heroes chronicles: conquest of the underworld

i will take out my befuddled rage on necropolis

[Flannel Boy]

Only idiots pay for wind and rain insurance hoping it will cover them during a hurricane. 

Who's joke character is this, seriously?

[Crushed]

huh

well, i guess that's what i get for sticking my nose in political threads

bewilderment, and a sense of sorrow for the time i could've spent playing heroes chronicles: conquest of the underworld

i will take out my befuddled rage on necropolis

i wasn't addressing you, btw, it's just the concept itself is so flawed yet is embraced by so many people

[Eel O'Brian]

nah, i just meant in general

i don't even really understand what everyone was arguing about, to be honest, i just saw the flood thing and figured i'd flap my lips about it

[recursivelyenumerable]

The "political spectrum" is such a flawed high school-level approximation that leads to so many idiotic simplifications. It leads to false equivalences, and is prone to being shifted around so much that the "center" can be directly on your position, allowing you to label a moderate opinion as "extreme."

well, if there's to be a center, it makes sense to set it to the correct position, which is of course mine else why would I have it?

[Human Snorenado]

Not that a game of "poke Beardo with a stick" isn't fun and all, but let's get back to the task at hand- which is celebrating the imminent demise of modern conservatism and it's carrier host the GOP.  To celebrate I think we need to exhume the remains of Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, Jerry Falwell and Milton Friedman so we can properly rape/urinate upon those responsible for the past 28 years of poop.

[Positive Touch]

Not that a game of "poke Beardo with a stick" isn't fun and all, but let's get back to the task at hand- which is celebrating the imminent demise of modern conservatism and it's carrier host the GOP.  To celebrate I think we need to exhume the remains of Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, Jerry Falwell and Milton Friedman so we can properly rape/urinate upon those responsible for the past 28 years of poop.

man I've fantasized doing that so many times.  let's have a spring break meet-up and totally do it!

[Phoenix Dark]

Beardo is probably Mandark's joke character