Quick – a test for you, reader.
Think conservative. Think of the types of people who are, generally speaking, conservative. Name some you know.
Now think liberal; liberal types of people; liberal people you know. Keep both groups in mind for a few minutes.
It is only natural to grow accustomed to certain assumptions: you would never, for example, critically re-examine why it is better to have an umbrella when it rains. Obviously, it helps to keep you dry. But as other to ideas we hold, such as who constitutes the typical liberal or conservative, a shifting political reality demands that we apply a critical eye.
What does our news media, popular entertainment, and pop culture tell us about how we’re supposed think about liberals and conservatives? I’ll elaborate my perspective on this question.
Who are the “liberals?” They’re women, minorities, gays, “transient workers,” the poor, (now apparently) the “middle class,” and union workers. If you listen to Democrats, they’ll tell you story after horror story about people in these neatly divided classes who have suffered at the hand of big business, racism, an unjust criminal code, and sexism.
And the conservatives? The conservatives, particularly the “Republicans,” are white males, religious people, the “rich,” and a curious mix of racists and rednecks, either seething with hatred of all minorities or madly in love with their guns, if not both. If you listen to elected Republicans, too many waste precious news time explaining that they’re not really racist, that they really do care about the “middle class,” and oppose theocracy. Fortunately for these weak “leaders,” such as Mr. Boehner, very few conservatives are listening to their weak voices.
Now think back to your initial groups. Check it against your daily experience. Speaking personally, I know conservative gays, conservative women, conservative union members, conservative immigrants (legal, of course), conservative teachers, etc. I know wealthy liberals. I know lower middle class conservatives. You probably do too.
So what? The groups aren’t perfect, you say, but they’re more or less accurate. It’s true that groups typically associated with Democrats vote for them, and the same goes for Republicans. What kind of a ridiculous article is this?
May I implore the good reader to think deeper? Democrats, it is indisputable, seek to portray Republicans as uncaring because they are relatively more resistant to extending special privileges to (read: pandering to) certain factions of the population. Said Speaker Pelosi in October: “Under this bill, when the Republicans vote for this bill today, they will be voting to say that women can die on the floor and health care providers do not have to intervene if this bill is passed. It’s just appalling.” As underwhelming as Speaker Boehner is, it’s difficult to imagine that he wants any part of women dying on the floor.
Such revolting rhetoric is symptomatic of a political party that no longer represents all citizens. Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and all of the Democrat leadership have adopted an extremely cynical and destructive agenda and campaigning tactics that divide us by race, sex, and income bracket. On the promise of rewarding 50.1% of the population at the expense of the other 49.9%, they are staking virtually all their election prospects. Such a campaign is guaranteed to be poisonous, angry, personal, and downright dirty. Democrats have themselves made this explicit:
All pretense of trying to win a majority of the white working class has been effectively jettisoned in favor of cementing a center-left coalition made up, on the one hand, of voters who have gotten ahead on the basis of educational attainment — professors, artists, designers, editors, human resources managers, lawyers, librarians, social workers, teachers and therapists — and a second, substantial constituency of lower-income voters who are disproportionately African-American and Hispanic.
Democrats know, through recent experience, that their promises for a better country are lies. The “working class,” after 3 years of Obama, is suffering with extraordinary unemployment, debt, and loss of personal freedom. The black community is suffering especially hard. All kinds of Americans are languishing under a vigorous and systematic statist agenda, one that proscribes private property rights and selectively applies laws, to say nothing of its dangerously inept foreign policy. Obama and his advisers know that the economy is stalled; they admit just that each time Obama says “Pass this bill now!”
But why would they do this? The reason is not difficult to understand, but can difficult to believe and accept. Democrats are power hungry. They want a permanent class of overlords, managers, intellectuals, and state-funded “scientists.” In capitalist countries, like traditional America, a permanence of power among a small clique is exceptionally rare. The greatest families of this nation – the Morgans, the Rockefellers, the Vanderbuilts, the Roosevelts – achieved power, sure. But not power that spans centuries, like the aristocracy and royalty of Europe. To achieve longevity requires the co-opting of the political system.
These ideas may sound conspiratorial, but they have a long, written history. Plato’s Republic was “ideal,” presumably fair, and totalitarian. Skipping the various manifestations of tyranny that spanned the Middle Ages, French philosophers revived the myth of a virtuous ruling class that could eradicate the troubles of life. Saint-Simon imbued Auguste Comte with a false knowledge of man, Comte in turn influenced Hegel, and it was Hegel who gave Marx his famous dialectic. (See Hayek.) Rousseau contributed the romantic notion of a virtuous natural world beleaguered only by corrupt human institutions. The destruction of Western political culture comes from those who always promise smarter “rule” through revolution.
Among a massive state apparatus that treats a citizen like a client there is no room for a party that represents a free people, much less a free people to elect such a party. The people vote for Party A, because A promises to give more to more people than Party B. It’s impossible to promise two people the same loaf of bread, but it is possible to offer them the same nebulous entitlement program. See Canada, where neither party opposes nationalized healthcare in principle, but only in trivial detail. See England, where Prime Minister Cameron meekly manages a dangerous decline. See Europe, as it erupts in chaos as a result of diminishing rations. Yet in all the turmoil and debt, do you see any political party in Canada, the U.K., or the EU standing athwart history? Do you hear them yelling stop?
America’s unique tradition of liberty has preserved the freedom of her citizens. Right now, our nation’s future is in danger. Democrats are potentially one election away from cementing their agenda to remake the American government into a giant corporation, thus rendering the American people customers without any alternatives or legal recourse. Fundamental transformation is their stated goal, and divide and conquer is their strategy for victory.
Speaker Boehner and every presidential candidate should explain to the American people what is at stake. Explain what President Reagan meant when he said:
Since when do we in America believe that our society is made up of two diametrically opposed classes – one rich, one poor – both in a permanent state of conflict and neither able to get ahead except at the expense of the other? Since when do we in America accept this alien and discredited theory of social and class warfare? Since when do we in America endorse the politics of envy and division?
Do not let yourself be identified as your government as anything else but an American, and reject the familiar caricature of political identities. Demand nothing more than your rights. This staid mentality will be what saves us or won’t.