Monday, November 12, 2012

Should Conservatives wear Tee Shirts and Hats?

There's something that's been rattling around in my mind for a while and I think I may have finally put my finger on it.   It's the idea of the "Conservative Movement" or the idea that many people identify themselves as "Conservatives."   As mentioned in a past post, people have identified me as a "liberal" or a "lefty" in recent years.   That label surprised me and still makes me somewhat uncomfortable.   I don't necessarily think of myself as a "liberal" or a "progressive" and certainly not as a "lefty."   I agree with Rachael Maddow's self-analysis that she would have been an Eisenhower Republican back in the 50s but that the whole political spectrum has veered so far to the right so as to leave her way over on the left.   I think that applies to me also.   I never thought of myself in earlier days as a "conservative" or a "liberal" and I tended to vote Republican but usually for the person I felt was the best candidate on his own merits.   And "his own merits" was universally the standard years ago.   Very few, if any, women ran for office.

Maybe I am wrong here, but my sense is that many people who vote Democratic and could be considered "Liberal" or "Progressive" are not quite as invested in the label as are many on the right.   In my own case, I guess that I really consider myself to be a pragmatist first and foremost.   Or maybe, realistic.   I try to be analytical and realistic and practical in my decision making, including decisions about political questions and political candidates.   To me, abortion is not so much a theoretical, religious, or metaphysical issue as a practical issue of whether abortions should be safe and legal.   Realistically, we are going to have abortions.   Making abortion illegal again won't stop abortions from happening, it will just make them more dangerous.   I think the same logic applies to abstinence-only sex education.   That's just not a very realistic approach to sex education, in my opinion.   That same analysis would apply to the death penalty.   I don't have any great moral objection to the death penalty, I simply feel that our legal system is much too unreliable to justify putting a defendant to death.   We can carry this line of thinking on to other subjects like the "War on Drugs."   I've been a foot soldier in that "War" for many, many years.   It hasn't worked.   It's time to go another direction.   Legalizing marijuana, taxing it, and regulating it seems to be a far better approach to my way of thinking.   And I have felt for years that we should have been trying to foster birth control around the world as hard and fast as we could go.   I don't really care what Catholics or any other religious group believe about birth control.   We have 7 billion people on Earth and we are going to be facing a scary overpopulation problem in a few more decades if we don't do something soon.   Simple practicality dictates to my way of thinking that we should take whatever steps we have available to try to avoid this outcome.

Maybe the sum of all of those opinions throws me into the "progressive" or "liberal" camp.   However, I feel no great personal stake in being considered a "progressive" or a "liberal."   I just want things to work as advantageously as possible.   I think the many "Conservatives," capitol "C," have become so invested in being considered "Conservatives" and standing up for "Conservative principles" that they have begun to put the cart before the horse.   The Republican program of obstructionism in Congress that was signaled by Rush Limbaugh's "I hope he fails" comment and Senator Mitch McConnell's "number one goal" statement are evidence of this mindset.   What Rush was really saying is something like this:   "I am a Conservative and I believe that Conservative principles offer the best hope for a strong America.   Obama doesn't accept this and wants to impose a liberal agenda on America.   Liberal policies do not offer the best hope for a strong America.    There is no reason to let the President try his liberal ideas because we all know that they won't work.   So, therefore, I hope he fails with his policies so that we Conservatives can as quickly as possible take back control of the government and implement the Conservative policies that we all agree will work."   I wonder why if Mitch McConnell and Rush Limbaugh were so sure that President Obama's policies wouldn't work, they wouldn't want to let him try them and prove once and for all that they don't work.  

In any event, it seems to me that in a sense that many "Conservatives" have become more loyal to their concept of "Conservatism" and "Conservative Principles" than they are to the country.   I would argue that "Conservative Principles" or a "Liberal Agenda" are not ends in themselves but merely the means to an end, that end being good and effective government.   "Conservatives" in the recent election have shown a tendency to fudge the facts and take a somewhat unrealistic view of the country's economic situation in an effort to demonize President Obama and his accomplishments.   The unemployment rate really is 7.9%.   Refusing to accept that is not an argument for electing a Conservative President.   Distorting the reality of what a progressive Administration in Washington has produced is not an argument for Conservative principles.   The stock market really has doubled over its low point.   Housing starts and auto sales really are up of late.   "Conservatism" is a means, not an end in itself.   If Conservatives are so sure that their ideas work best, then why do they seem to fear letting their ideas complete fair and square in the "marketplace of ideas."   Why all the mendacity and voter suppression?   In any event, I almost expect to see some of my Conservative friends and colleagues wearing tee shirts and hats emblazoned with a profile of Ronald Reagan with"Conservative" in big red letters spelled out below.  

The great Chinese reformer Deng Xiaoping famously asked who should care about the color of the cat as long as it catches mice, and whether you call it "Communism" or "Capitalism" shouldn't really matter if the concepts work to help the Chinese people.   Deng clearly recognized that "Communism" was not an end in itself but merely a means to the end of giving the Chinese people effective government and a prosperous economy.   If something else worked better, then Deng was all for it.   Thus began the great liberalization of the Chinese economy.   If you think the Chinese are strict Communists, just try walking around the Great Wall for a while and see how many vendors you have to fight off.   Been there, done that.   You can hardly take a step in China without somebody trying to sell you something.   On a walk down Nanjing Road in Shanghai one Saturday evening several years ago, 11 independent Chinese businesswomen approached me selling their wares.   Several other salesmen offered me the chance to buy a Rolex at a very favorable price.   I also had my choice of McDonald's, Burger King, Pizza Hut, and Kentucky Fried Chicken.   Capitalism and free enterprise now flourish in ancient China.   Chairman Mao must be turning over in his grave as I write this.   But nobody can question that the Chinese economy has flourished in recent times.

So I am not going to start wearing anybody's tee shirts, Conservative or Liberal.   If I can be convinced that some Conservative idea works better than what we are doing now, then I am all for it.    However, I am going to need actual evidence, not just more hysterical, factually slippery commentary from Fox News or right-wing talk radio.   One issue where I am yet to be convinced by either side is on immigration.   I have no objection to immigrants but I am concerned that people desiring to immigrate should follow our laws.   This is a complex and sensitive subject and I am interested to see what each side will propose as a solution or solutions.

No comments:

Post a Comment