It surprised me to learn that author and activist David Horowitz, in trying to launch and lead a campaign to deindoctrinate/liberalize our universities, met resistance not just from the Left, but from the Right as well.
I read Little Green Footballs for a time, but I found the guy behind it seemingly more focused on attaining a feeling of moral and intellectual superiority than in substantive discussion. Specifically, I noticed that he often used the Leftist tactic of sarcastic mockery, and still does. Now he has repudiated the Republican Party entirely, apparently, which should come as a surprise only to those who failed to see the intellectual package that was on display regularly.
Pondering all of this, I felt I might make a comment or two. First and foremost, we are fighting a well funded adversary, that has been waging a well planned, well executed campaign for the minds of our children for some 50 years or more. They lose some along the way, but the fact of the matter is that most adults in this nation are not able to fully explain or understand some of the most important and basic aspects of our system, such as Medicare, Social Security, the Federal Reserve, and what the Constituation actually says about religion and abortion. Yet, they still have strong opinions.
What I see on the right, often, is good philosophy. I see people taking the time to articulate and defend arguments. Yet, so often, they do not follow up by taking the time to interact with people whose views are similar to their own, but a little different. In fact, sometimes they get nasty with one another, as LGF Charles Johnson did with Robert Spencer several years ago. I’m 100% behind Spencer, BTW, even though I am not quite as pessimistic as he seems to be.
It seems to me that many conservatives either want to be smart, or be heard. Obviously, talkshow hosts are mainly looking for an added source of revenue from an existing fan base. Most of the people who buy their books are already in the fold.
It is not enough to have good, defensible ideas. What we have is a pragmatic problem, and this is reaching across the space that divides us to people who are not already dogmatic and ardent conservatives.
This requires a qualitative shift. We need to not only propose good ideas, but propose them in the context of DIALOGUE. This will start with all conservatives getting along better with one another. The national Republican Party is unsure what to make of the Tea Partiers. They need to talk. They need to communicate.
And in my view they need to do it in this way: screw the political “realities” and calculations: What is the truth? How can we describe, say, the institution of Sociel Security with as much accuracy and relevant detail as possible? Is it solvent? Can it be made solvent? How? How many different ways? Is it the best solution for the problem it is trying to solve? Precisely what problem IS it trying to solve? How well is it working? What alternatives exist which protect what is best in it, and eliminate what is bad in it? Etc.
Human vanity causes so much unnecessary suffering and grief. People don’t start trying to understand first, then discuss later, but rather to propose an opinion, and get it adopted. This is stupid.
Propaganda begins where honest discussion stops. The reality is that conservatives have their propaganda too. Social welfare programs are intrinsically bad. We don’t owe our fellow citizens anything but a chance to succeed. Government is never the answer. True patriots back all wars.
I am what I call a conservative Liberal, where Liberalism is the doctrine that the sole essential role of government is to protect me from my fellow citizens, and from foreign invaders. At the same time, I am not unwilling to grant, say, State governments the authority to implement some sort of minimal social safety net. In time, if we grow the economy sufficiently, or restructure our economy in the right way, there will be no NEED for such precautions, as poverty will be abolished.
It seems to me, though, that we need to be willing to think all thoughts. We need to be willing to compromise at times with people making valid arguments. Now, I see no valid arguments for Obamacare, so I oppose it entirely. But for something like Social Security, or Medicare, there is room for compromise. The simple reality is that these programs cannot continue in the form in which they exist currently for all that much longer. They are broke. This requires us to make decisions, and we will make the smartest decisions if we discuss our options dispassionately, and include as many viewpoints which are at least potentially valid as possible.
The Tea Party is an energy. It is a frustration. It lacks direction. Our problem is not high taxes, but excessive government. Obama has not even raised taxes yet. He has just radically increased our debt, and subverted some key components of personal liberty.
This is a time for personal and collective reflection. We need to think about what we are doing. We need to be humble, and listen to other viewpoints. We need to be as inclusive as possible, and that trait alone will over time destroy the hard left, since most of the people who occupy it don’t really grasp just what the ideological leaders really want. This is a universal in radical movements, where relative moderates are deceived into supporting radicals, until those radicals get power, and throw them in jail, “reeducate” them, or just shoot them for simplicity.
This is not the most cogent thing I’ve ever written, but hopefully some of this makes sense.
For what it’s worth, in writing this, this is the joke I had in mind.