As I expected that day, there were many bromides tossed about during speeches about responsibility, about independence, ending government spending. What I did not hear from anyone was a moral defense of capitalism, because as Ayn Rand and other Objectivists since have pointed out so amply, the Conservative movement doesn't believe in a moral defense of capitalism.
My Tea Party Awakening.
As I entered the protest, along with two of my friends, I was handed what I thought was a political pamphlet. One would expect such a thing when sojourning into a protest of any kind. The outside had a proud American eagle, and in the background there was a proud American eagle staring boldly out at you. However, when you opened it no mention of America or pride or independent spirit evoked from the front was in there. It was in fact a Christian tract, and not even a Christian tract related to the day's events, but a real tract talking of accepting Jesus Christ into your life or facing eternal damnation. It had Pilgrim's Progress-style drawings, with men carrying heavy burdens up a hillside. My friends and I had a good laugh about it, but it was immediately disheartening that the first thing at a rally about oppressive taxation, hosted by Rochester Conservatives that the first thing you receive is a tract about your natural guilty state as a human being. It only got worse. Before we reached the mass of people, we passed by signs that stated "One Nation Under God". It only got worse, as one of the first speakers turned out to be a local Reverend. He did not give any kind of religious speech (Or at least it wasn't some revivalist hoopla.), but why a Reverend? And why one talking about how people should be independent? I am actually glad a man handed me a Tract, because it helped me stay in reality. I am around what I can only assume is a religious group of people. They cheer and boo at the right times, but do they understand what they are cheering and booing? Do they truly understand why redistribution of wealth is an immoral concept? I don't believe so.
If you go back to the speech of my video, nearer to the end a woman raises her voice and says "Share our work ethic, not our money.". That perturbed me, and it shook my concentration. I wanted to grab her and say "You are NOT your brother's keeper. You are your own keeper.". I realize, however, that I was not there to preach against religion as much as they were not there to preach for their religion. So I did not. I went on, but I went on discouraged that someone who had cheered me denouncing sacrifice as immoral would say such a thing. They do not understand the fundamental ideas of capitalism, because their fundamental ideas run contrary to it.
The Problems of Conservatism in America.
The fundamental contradiction that all of those who claim to be conservatives make is that altruism is the ethical ideal of their system. This idea, fueled by the modern philosophy of Immanuel Kant and others, is totally incompatible with a rational laissez-faire society. Conservatives consistently cling to the idea that it is honorable, glorious and righteous for one man to give up his own will and his own values in return for what? For nothing. It is his duty to give things up. It is his duty to give something to others, whether or not that other earned it or deserves it.
Why do conservatives continually put up with this contradiction? Why do they not choose one or the other, capitalism or socialism-Rand or Kant? It is because of another idea that conservatives must believe in to hold the name: the elevation of tradition. Conservatives regularly bash the Left for being members of a "Progressive" movement. They admit here that they are inherently afraid of change, and while it is right to resist the change offered by those goons on the Left, it is suicidal to refuse to ever accept progress. We can thank the abolitionists and those radical enough to say that all men, truly all men, are created equal and not just white property owners. These people were not seeking to destroy America, but to be consistent with the ideal of equality. It is certainly good that our own Founding Fathers were not conservative in their actions against a tyrannical government that would reduce their colony to that of just another resource. Their actions were radical, unheard of. No decent white man would ever do such a thing as rebel just because of some measly taxes! But they did, and in their radical and liberal view of government, they founded the first truly moral nation on Earth. Had they respected tradition, they would have gone on as things had gone. We would have stagnated and the world we now know would probably still be horse-driven.
Does it make sense, therefore, to preserve things as they are? Conservatives become very unpopular in hard times because they often offer the same old lines, while giving the Democrats carte-blanche on the platform of radical change. That is what Obama promised, and it seems he may be delivering on that. During the campaign, the best McCain could do was to Me-Too the economic ideas of Obama while decrying the underlying ideas that he himself did not seem to understand. He complained of Obama's redistributionist streak, while promising to bailout every American's mortgage. McCain's struggle was a microcosm of the conservative condition during a time of crisis, while trying to rest on his old ideas and still trying to appear like the new guy, still trying to seem altruistic. But in the end, America decided that Obama was simply more consistent than McCain. McCain tried to make the case of capitalism, but that is impossible on a platform of altruism and "Country First". The contradictions abounded, as the Republicans focused on slim pickings of "pork spending" while ignoring the enormous debt garnered by their own policies over the last 8 years. Such a thing can only be referred to, as blogger Gus Van Horn put it, focusing on petty theft and turning a blind eye to grand larceny. This reveals that conservatives aren't that worried about redistribution, but that they don't believe in earmarks which take away from nation prosperity. How can such an absolutely, excuse the term, retarded position continue to hold water? It cannot. A political philosophy divided against itself cannot stand, and we are now witnessing it's struggle to unite under one of it's ideas, individualism or collectivism?
Part Two to come mid-week.
Does it make sense, therefore, to preserve things as they are? Conservatives become very unpopular in hard times because they often offer the same old lines, while giving the Democrats carte-blanche on the platform of radical change. That is what Obama promised, and it seems he may be delivering on that. During the campaign, the best McCain could do was to Me-Too the economic ideas of Obama while decrying the underlying ideas that he himself did not seem to understand. He complained of Obama's redistributionist streak, while promising to bailout every American's mortgage. McCain's struggle was a microcosm of the conservative condition during a time of crisis, while trying to rest on his old ideas and still trying to appear like the new guy, still trying to seem altruistic. But in the end, America decided that Obama was simply more consistent than McCain. McCain tried to make the case of capitalism, but that is impossible on a platform of altruism and "Country First". The contradictions abounded, as the Republicans focused on slim pickings of "pork spending" while ignoring the enormous debt garnered by their own policies over the last 8 years. Such a thing can only be referred to, as blogger Gus Van Horn put it, focusing on petty theft and turning a blind eye to grand larceny. This reveals that conservatives aren't that worried about redistribution, but that they don't believe in earmarks which take away from nation prosperity. How can such an absolutely, excuse the term, retarded position continue to hold water? It cannot. A political philosophy divided against itself cannot stand, and we are now witnessing it's struggle to unite under one of it's ideas, individualism or collectivism?
Part Two to come mid-week.
No comments:
Post a Comment