Put aside the issues. They don't really matter anyhow, at least not in the long run.
Abortion wasn't an issue when this country was founded, and 50 years from now it probably won't be a concern either. Whether birth control advances to the point that unwanted pregnancies do not exist, or the tree-huggers are right and we wreck the environment and our health to the point that no man can achieve an erection and all babies are conceived in labs.
The War on Terror could not have been imagined 50 years ago, and 50 years from now it will simply be a chapter, or worse paragraph, in a 6th grade history text book. Maybe my grandchildren will ask me about 9-11 for a school report and I'll be able to bore then to tears.
Even issues like Social Security and Medicare will fade. Eventually they will collapse. When they do we'll replace them with a new program. Better or worse, it will take no time before we begin forget the old way and start to see the new system as the only method we know.
No, my friends, in the long term, conservative vs. liberal is not a matter of issues, nor should it be. There is a bigger, deeper rift. One which dominates these issues and though seldom debated on its own merits is the larger context to every battle we wage within this country. Simply put, it is a matter of faith.
Now, I'm not talking religion here. Its not that kind of faith. I'm talking about the faith you feel in your gut, not what flows forth from a pulpit. I'm talking about the instinctual, tactile faith you have in humanity.
Do you trust the individual? Do you trust the group? Where is your faith?
My faith is and always has been in the individual. My trust is firmly in the conscious, intelligence, resourcefulness, and will-power of a man left to create his own destiny. Because of this, I am conservative. Proudly so.
I think back on my time at Oklahoma State University, and consider the friends I had in the Greek Fraternal system. Talking after class, splitting a pitcher at Joe's, or just walking across campus with any one of these individuals and you were likely to have spent your time engaged in pleasant and occasionally stimulating conversation. Generally nice guys and girls, often with interesting and unique views on the world. But that was on an individual basis. Put more than two frat boys in the same room, and... well you may not have intended to visit Jackass City that particular day and time, but your ticket just got punched all the same.
You see the power of the group is to reduce. To take all the specialized gifts inherent in any collection of individuals, and reduce these to the lowest common denominator. You don't beleive me? Visit a mall the week before Christmas or the day after. Go to any concert featuring the teenie bopper, boy band flavor-of-the-week. Go sit in a bar any night the local team is on ESPN. Or for that matter, sit in the peanut gallery of the US Senate for one afternoon.
Do any of these and you'll understand that the group strives to find common ground, to find what unites. This, of course, leads to a downward shift. The lowest common denominator. The bigger the crowd, the lower they must think.
Consider for a second, the mighty oak.
Forgive me the metaphor, but what is an essay on political philosophy without a metaphor or two.
The higher an oak reaches into the sky, the broader its branches spread. The wind then can whip among the leaves and branches and not damage the tree. In fact branches on opposite sides of the tree can sway in completely opposite direction, and yet the tree survives.
However, to the group, no individual branch or leaf is important, only the base of the trunk matters, for that is what keeps that tree as a whole, intact and upright. So in "tree think", screw the branches. Screw the leaves. All that matters is that trunk.
Now that's all well and good. Nothing wrong with wanting to keep the tree firmly rooted.
Problem is, I want to see the tree grow. I want to see the limbs and branches stretching so high into the sky... I want to stand on the surface of the moon and barely have to stretch as I reach out and pluck the fruit of democracy and freedom from this American oak tree.
Alright, metaphor thoroughly exhausted. So, ridiculous and curious as it is, of course I'll keep referencing it.
Point is...
Liberals for too long have talked about the "mountain top," about broad visions for a perfect society, all the while placing their faith not in individual achievement, but in group think and group control. Their programs call for the government, the base of the tree, to direct the sway and twist of the individual branches and leaves. They don't seem to understand that the only mountain top which can be achieved in a society that operates in the context of its lowest common denominator is a mountain made of dung.
To the contrary, conservatives place our faith in individual achievement. To us, that base of the trunk is just that: a base. It serves to support us, protect us, and little more. Yes, it unites us at the most basic level, but we do not plan from that point. We do not take direction from it. Each leaf, each bud, must be allowed to twist in the wind as best suits it. Allow the individual parts to flourish as best conditions allow them, and the tree will grow, and spread and be beautiful.
Hey, why not another metaphor...
We are all born with that mountain before us and begin to climb. And when someone slips, and slides halfway down, the liberal philosophy is that we should all climb back down to that individual, and restart the climb together, holding hands and singing "Kum Ba Ya."
The conservative philosophy is for each climber to go at his or her own pace, gaining skills and confidence. And then, when you've reached the top, tie a line and toss it down to those below you.
You see, its not about abortion, gay rights, terrorism, prayer in school, welfare, or even the words "under God" in the pledge. Those are only shots, not the war. Its a matter of faith. Misplaced trust in groups, or confidence that within all of us there is a champion, who if encourage yet allowed to develop unique talents and skills can climb to the mountain top, yet who can never be drug there.
My friends, it IS a matter of faith. Where is yours?
15 comments:
See, the problem with that is that we actually do need to deal with issues that face us NOW. And currently, we've attacked a country for no apparent reason, we're banning gay marriage for no apparent reason, we're spending money that we don't have like there's no tomorrow and we're wrecking the environment. Perhaps we should stop focusing so much on our conservative roots and worry more about today and what's facing us now...
Oh, and based on the record of our current president, my faith IS NOT in him...
Id love to have faith in people. That theyd extend a hand when needed and do the right thing when they are supposed to.
But thats not the American way of life now is it?
Get ahead is the American way of life. And in the process people are stepped on and knocked down and not picked back up to begin the climb again.
So while its a nice theory that man will do to man as he would like to have done to him---for a large percentage of the US--thats just not the case.
Courtney,
Let's ingnore the fact that we had clear provocation to go into Iraq as evidenced by former President Clinton, Sen. John Kerry, and Sen. Hillary Clinton, and as detailed in pages and pages of our past correspondence. Let's ignore the deeper context of the gay marriage debate and our activist court system (I'm voting against the Texas amendment, by the way). Let's ingore that yes, politicians are politicians and they spend money like fools, and even Democrats are refusing to kill their pork from the transportation bill to pay for Katrina. And yes, let's even ignore the fact that our environment is in better shape now than its been in 150 years and even at that, there remains no concrete proof that we are able to inflict long-term damage to our environment.
This is a discussion of the larger philosophical context. Yes, we must deal with the issues of the day, but until one has had such a debate within oneself, it is impossible to honestly deal with the issues of the day. you must be solid in your core first. These underlying issues shape the outcome of our actions in both the short and long term. A lack of understanding of these allows one to be pulled along by radicals with catchy slogans into fighting for a philosophy you don't full understand. Not dealing with these issues leads to lost arguements, lost years, and a lost path.
And frankly hon. Taking a cheap, unfounded shot a the President here seems to indicate either a lack of cohesive arguement to counter my assertions, or a fundamental lack of desire/ability to understand them. I can't imagine the latter is true, so I have to believe you agree with conservatism, even if you have bought into the left-wing hype that makes you blindly hate Republicans.
You know you wanna be a conservative, sugga. You know it in your heart. Right is right. Give up the pettiness and come on over to the light. ;-)
Have a great weekend.
Actually, sugga - tell me again why it is that we're at war with Iraq? Because I, along with the American public, was led to believe that we're there due to WMD, which we've now stopped searching for without even an explanation as to why or an apology for killing innocent people. I was also led to believe that we were there because of 9/11, but that can't be the case because subsequently, Dick Cheney stated in a certain Vice Presidential debate that there was no link between Iraq and 9/11. Hmm...
And tell me this: Did Clinton not at least work toward balancing the budget and actually accomplish that task during his time in office, sugga?
Shib, (Great name, by the way! how did ya get it?)
Its impossible to deny that there are bad people in this world. Heck, not even just bad. There are those who given every opportunity would do nothing. Never move, never strive, never fight.
I suppose I oughta make a comment here about bad folks like those of Enron getting away with bad deeds under a liberal White House and finally being arrested, tried and convicted with a conservative in the seat... but that's really not the point either.
There are people who will do bad. And yes, we must and do punish them. But to have faithin individuals is to have faith that most folks will do the right thing. Not everyone. But most. And for those that do choose evil, well, THAT is why conservatives are not anarchists. We do see a place for government. And one of the fundamental places is in removing those who impeed the freedom of others. And not with a slap on the wrist.
Meanwhile, helping those in need is certainly nice to do, and most will, but no, I do not beleive you can or should force anyone to do so. Maybe there is a bit of Karma in conservative philosophy too though. ;-)
And as for those that simply will not do for themselves? Well, that's where we have to remember that we don't all have the same dream. We ARE individuals, regardless of how we'd like to be governed and regardless of what is effective government. To those who would never do for themselves, such a life may be their heaven.
Regardless, we are each responsible first and foremost to ourselves and for ourselves. Short of disaster or great mental trauma, nothing is done to ourselves that we do not allow to happen.
Hopes yours is a wonderful weekend as well.
Alright, Courtney. But this is the last time. And frankly, I'm sad that you didn't keep those 15 or so pages of emails that we traded in the run up to last years election. We've been though all this.
We did go to war in Iraq in part because of WMD's which we ALL thought he had, and in fact have not yet proven that he did not. This arguement, in fact, was one of 4 major arguments for this war. Currently we HAVE found WMD's in Iraq as I've chronicalled to you in the past, though certainly not the stockpiles we thought we'd find. And yes, I say "we" because Bill Clinton also said they were there. As did his wife, John Kerry, the President of France, the chief UN Weapons Inspector and on and on and on. Now did they not exist? Were they carted off to Iran or Syria in the build up to the invasions. We don't yet know. At least not publically. But regardless, that was NOT the only reason for the war.
Further. you heard Dick Cheney right. There was no direct link to 9-11. And the administration NEVER said there was. That was a leap made by yourself, various columnists, and hell half the people in these states that I still do not understand. I watched everything you did, maye even more being I'm a C-Span junkie, and never ONCE got that impression. The only deep connection between the two is that 9-11 changed the climate. And we could no longer ignore the actions of this dictator as he actively sought to grow his arsenal and enhance his connections to terrorist organizations. AND yes, he HAD connections to Al Qaeda. Still don't beleive that, try reading the 9-11 Commision report again. They CLEARLY state that he was courting that group.
And finally, Bill Clinton never did have a balanced budget, but did indeed work for a PROJECTED balanced budget into his second term. AFTER Republicans took control of both Houses of Congress and he had little choice. Bill was good at a few things, but nothing was he better at understanding and reacting to the political winds.
NOW, can we get back th debate at hand.
Austin - there was no leap to be made. In the time leading up to the war, George Bush was asked about the cost of the war and his reply was that it wouldn't be greater than the cost of the lives lost in the terrorist attacks on 9/11. And he also said in the time leading up to the war that he would provide proof to the American people that Iraq was, in fact, linked to 9/11 (which he never did.) The leap that was made was actually by our president. And why? I feel like we were lied to and coerced into a war that shouldn't have been. Kerry was right: Wrong War, Wrong Time...
LOL. I only convert out of love, sugga.
Hon, I can only tell you this, I DO respect her right to have a different opinion. I respect everyone's right to that. but the right to have an opinion and to express it as you wish, is not the right to have that opinion go unchallenged. Case in point, I posted my opinion here, she decided to challenge that. Its a beautiful cycle, really.
But I also respect myself, my beliefs and my opinions as well as the facts. I believe I am right and will not simply say, "Eh, maybe not" just cause someone expresses a differing opinion. Fact is, I get excited when they do. That is the basis for debate. But as surely as I expect them to fight hard or what they beleive, do not ask me to fight any less hard for what I know in my heart to be true.
to dismiss a statement as opinion is not a reason to let it go unanswered. To the contrary, its reason to speak up in agreement or opposition to it. In fact, an opinion expressed IS itself a challenge.
Yes, I fight hard with folks like Courtney, and I am proud to do so. I deeply adore her as a cherished former student worker and as a friend. And if i'm hard on her its because I feel she can give more, fight better and be more. Understand that its tough love, but its love. She can argue better than that.
And I'm glad you haven't applied your feelings toward our President to me, though I might point out that you've told me you can't really qualify those feeling, justthat you don't like him. And I suspect, the opposite could be said of me. Can't really figure out why you like me some much, but still ya do.
Court,
I'd love to see your sources for those quotes. Honestly, if we can verify them both in words and context, you'll have an apology from me.
And as for Sen. Kerry... If he thought it was the wrong war at the wrong time, why agian did he vote in favor of it and only change his rhetoric to speak against the war when Howard Dean was pummling him in the early polls?
You're right, Kerry did vote for it initially, and then realized that it was a mistake. And while it was a sad initial miscalculation on his part, I do respect his ability to re-evaluate himself and his actions...
And you know Austin, I think you can actually be better in your arguments as well. Because while I do appreciate your "tough love," that languate in itself indicates your feelings of a "parent teaching a child." And frankly, I don't need to be taught by you. Because, when you include words such as "Sugga" and "Hon," it's belittling, and it's not appreciated...
With that said, I would like to add that the world wouldn't be nearly as interesting without conservatives to get pissed at...So thanks for ALWAYS PISSING ME OFF! You do a great job of it, HON :)
LOL. I'm always happy to piss you off. And for the record, I wish more people could see us as an example. Fight like cats and dogs over this stuff. But you know I still adore and love ya, and I know you feel the same for me. The rest of the world should know how good it is to have a friend that makes your blood boil. Especially on a Friday afternoon when bad government workers like us are trying our best not to actually accomplish anything.
Also, I do apologize if you are offended with the words I choose to express my adoration. Sincerely, that's what those are. Call it southern charm, call it flirting in battle. It is intended as a term of endearment and levity. Something to assure you that I take no arguement personally and adore you regardless. Also something I overuse in online conversation. I meant no offense.
Mel:
Thanks for your comments...Would love to meet you as well :)
Austin:
I totally disagree with you politically, but love ya anyway...
Post a Comment