TO HELL WITH CONSERVATISM

Hello, world.

This is what you get because I have been drinking coffee.

I am doing this partly to see how well my ideas hold up when written down and whether they should be modified. I may spawn qualified or even contrary thoughts as I proceed, and if I do I will present 'em. I am also educable, one of my vices; so I would be glad to hear from you. I hope what I am saying will at least occasion some soul-searching.

The reason for the title is the wave of adulation for conservatism, or for "conservative principles," that we read about all the time. I think that had better be countered. Liberals seem afraid to do so. I am more a radical than a liberal and I like to go to basics.

What is socio-political conservatism? What do all the movements and institutions properly so labeled have in common? My answer is that conservatism comes down to advocacy of privilege. It is the way selfish groups with power protect their unaccountable positions and justify their predation. Conservatives were originally the aristocracy and the slave-owners, then the robber barons and their minions, then the nouveau riche who didn't want their incomes taxed or their businesses regulated to protect the public. If I have everything and you have next to nothing and I want to not only keep it that way but press my advantage over you, what do you suppose I am going to call myself?

There are many who consider themselves conservatives but are not piggish. I think they should unconfuse themselves. What they are after is not a conservative social order.

I do not wish, by the way, to excuse the contemporary political scene, which is a melange of liberal and conservative arrangments. The status quo is not acceptable to me. "More for everybody" is not going to cut it.

Conservatism tends to feudalism. But the original feudalism had a fixed place and guarantees for every class of people. The new feudalism is a game of each against all, rigged in favor of those who start out holding most of the cards.

The American political left is defined by its stance for equality before the law (as in civil rights legislation), for equality in security of person (as in Social Security), and for equality of opportunity (as in giving those who are knocked down a governmental hand up as opposed to abandoning them to private discretionary charity).

The political right is defined by a belief in inequality, in stratification, and in concentrating wealth and social decision-making in relatively few hands. Its members are implicitly or explicitly cynical about the worth and the rights of most people, as turns up in their conversations.

Populist, teabagger conservatives talk as though it were otherwise, but a little scrutiny belies that. They are the ones who already have it made. "Hands Off My Health Care" means, "I've got mine. Screw you." Riding around in corporate buses to disrupt town hall meetings lets right-wing anarchy trump reason and democracy. Their idea of social justice is that if you lose everything because of the right-wing economic arrangements that are enriching them, their money should not be used to keep you going.

If you think my definition is off, all you have to do is provide me with an example of a group generally acknowledged to be conservative that opposes what is to the special benefit of its own class or race: not, mind you, when that special benefit is used to even things up but only when its purpose is to keep them from being evened up.

That will be enough for one day. I hope you will come back.