Attention All Liberals And Leftwingers

[WIP]

If there is one big reason why I bolted and left all of rightwing political thinking behind me, it was the gradual discovery over the last ten years that individual conservative and libertarian causes weren't making sense. There were all of these little paradoxes like:

why are rightwing capitalists who casually brush off poverty on the local and global level, so wound up about "unborn babies"....so wound up that they wave their general rules against government interference;

why are U.S. conservatives so concerned about every penny spend on domestic budgets, but change the subject quick when it comes to government spending on the military;

how did Rightwing Christianity go from the traditional suspicious and hostile view of those who accumulate wealth to one that celebrates and revels in material wealth.

These are just some of the mysteries of modern political/religious thinking that stopped making sense and cannot be explained as long as issues are compartmentalized into neat little categories: abortion, taxation, government spending, defense etc. An integrated view is necessary that examines the agenda behind the Conservative Movement and takes a look at what their goals are for transforming what they consider a secular, immoral society.

There have been many writers on the left of late who are taking a hard look at the authoritarian roots of conservatism and taking an integrated approach to right wing causes as a way to understand what this movement and its philosophy is really all about. A good jumping off point for exploring conservative motivations is posted today by George Lakoff on Alternet: What the Right-wing Assault on Women, Unions, the Environment, Health Care and PBS Is All About

The central issue in our political life is not being discussed. At stake is the moral basis of American democracy.

Budget deficits are a ruse, as we've seen in Wisconsin, where the Governor turned a surplus into a deficit by providing corporate tax breaks, and then used the deficit as a ploy to break the unions, not just in Wisconsin, but seeking to be the first domino in a nationwide conservative movement. Deficits can be addressed by raising revenue, plugging tax loopholes, putting people to work, and developing the economy long-term in all the ways the President has discussed. But deficits are not what really matters to conservatives.

Conservatives really want to change the basis of American life, to make America run according to the conservative moral worldview in all areas of life.

Conservatives believe in individual responsibility alone, not social responsibility. They don't think government should help its citizens. That is, they don't think citizens should help each other. The part of government they want to cut is not the military (we have 174 bases around the world), not government subsidies to corporations, not the aspect of government that fits their worldview. They want to cut the part that helps people. Why? Because that violates individual responsibility.

But where does that view of individual responsibility alone come from?...............

The

way to understand the conservative moral system

is to consider a strict father family. The father is The Decider, the ultimate moral authority in the family. His authority must not be challenged. His job is to protect the family, to support the family (by winning competitions in the marketplace), and to teach his kids right from wrong by disciplining them physically when they do wrong. The use of force is necessary and required. Only then will children develop the internal discipline to become moral beings. And only with such discipline will they be able to prosper. And what of people who are not prosperous? They don't have discipline, and without discipline they cannot be moral, so they deserve their poverty. The good people are hence the prosperous people. Helping others takes away their discipline, and hence makes them both unable to prosper on their own and function morally.

The market itself is seen in this way. The slogan, "Let the market decide" assumes the market itself is The Decider. The market is seen as both natural (since it si assumed that people naturally seek their self-interest) and moral (if everyone seeks their own profit, the profit of all will be maximized by the invisible hand). As the ultimate moral authority,

there should be no power higher than the market

that might go against market values. Thus the government can spend money to protect the market and promote market values, but should not rule over it either through (1) regulation, (2) taxation, (3) unions and worker rights, (4) environmental protection or food safety laws, and (5) tort cases. Moreover, government should not do public service. The market has service industries for that. Thus, it would be wrong for the government to provide health care, education, public broadcasting, public parks, and so on............

In conservative family life, the strict father rules.

Fathers and husbands should have control over reproduction

; hence, parental and spousal notification laws and opposition to abortion. In conservative religion, God is seen as the strict father, the Lord, who rewards and punishes according to individual responsibility in following his Biblical word.

Above all, the authority of conservatism itself must be maintained. The country should be ruled by conservative values, and progressive values are seen as evil. Science should have authority over the market, and so

the science of global warming and evolution must be denied.

......................

Freedom is defined as being your own strict father - with individual not social responsibility, and without any government authority telling you what you can and cannot do. To defend that freedom as an individual, you will of course need a gun.

This is the America that conservatives really want. Budget deficits are convenient ruses for destroying American democracy and replacing it with conservative rule in all areas of life.

What is saddest of all is to see Democrats helping them.

Exactly Mr. Lakoff! There are too many Democrats and liberals elsewhere who haven't been paying attention to the overall strategy that has changed our way of life over the last 30 years. And those who don't want to live under a Christian version of Muslim theocracy better wake up to it while we are still able to have a say about it.

Edited February 19, 2011 by WIP

[lukin]

If there is one big reason why I bolted and left all of rightwing political thinking behind me, it was the gradual discovery over the last ten years that individual conservative and libertarian causes weren't making sense. There were all of these little paradoxes like:

why are rightwing capitalists who casually brush off poverty on the local and global level, so wound up about "unborn babies"....so wound up that they wave their general rules against government interference;

why are U.S. conservatives so concerned about every penny spend on domestic budgets, but change the subject quick when it comes to government spending on the military;

how did Rightwing Christianity go from the traditional suspicious and hostile view of those who accumulate wealth to one that celebrates and revels in material wealth.

These are just some of the mysteries of modern political/religious thinking that stopped making sense and cannot be explained as long as issues are compartmentalized into neat little categories: abortion, taxation, government spending, defense etc. An integrated view is necessary that examines the agenda behind the Conservative Movement and takes a look at what their goals are for transforming what they consider a secular, immoral society.

There have been many writers on the left of late who are taking a hard look at the authoritarian roots of conservatism and taking an integrated approach to right wing causes as a way to understand what this movement and its philosophy is really all about. A good jumping off point for exploring conservative motivations is posted today by George Lakoff on Alternet: What the Right-wing Assault on Women, Unions, the Environment, Health Care and PBS Is All About

The central issue in our political life is not being discussed. At stake is the moral basis of American democracy.

Budget deficits are a ruse, as we've seen in Wisconsin, where the Governor turned a surplus into a deficit by providing corporate tax breaks, and then used the deficit as a ploy to break the unions, not just in Wisconsin, but seeking to be the first domino in a nationwide conservative movement. Deficits can be addressed by raising revenue, plugging tax loopholes, putting people to work, and developing the economy long-term in all the ways the President has discussed. But deficits are not what really matters to conservatives.

Conservatives really want to change the basis of American life, to make America run according to the conservative moral worldview in all areas of life.

Conservatives believe in individual responsibility alone, not social responsibility. They don't think government should help its citizens. That is, they don't think citizens should help each other. The part of government they want to cut is not the military (we have 174 bases around the world), not government subsidies to corporations, not the aspect of government that fits their worldview. They want to cut the part that helps people. Why? Because that violates individual responsibility.

But where does that view of individual responsibility alone come from?...............

The

way to understand the conservative moral system

is to consider a strict father family. The father is The Decider, the ultimate moral authority in the family. His authority must not be challenged. His job is to protect the family, to support the family (by winning competitions in the marketplace), and to teach his kids right from wrong by disciplining them physically when they do wrong. The use of force is necessary and required. Only then will children develop the internal discipline to become moral beings. And only with such discipline will they be able to prosper. And what of people who are not prosperous? They don't have discipline, and without discipline they cannot be moral, so they deserve their poverty. The good people are hence the prosperous people. Helping others takes away their discipline, and hence makes them both unable to prosper on their own and function morally.

The market itself is seen in this way. The slogan, "Let the market decide" assumes the market itself is The Decider. The market is seen as both natural (since it si assumed that people naturally seek their self-interest) and moral (if everyone seeks their own profit, the profit of all will be maximized by the invisible hand). As the ultimate moral authority,

there should be no power higher than the market

that might go against market values. Thus the government can spend money to protect the market and promote market values, but should not rule over it either through (1) regulation, (2) taxation, (3) unions and worker rights, (4) environmental protection or food safety laws, and (5) tort cases. Moreover, government should not do public service. The market has service industries for that. Thus, it would be wrong for the government to provide health care, education, public broadcasting, public parks, and so on............

In conservative family life, the strict father rules.

Fathers and husbands should have control over reproduction

; hence, parental and spousal notification laws and opposition to abortion. In conservative religion, God is seen as the strict father, the Lord, who rewards and punishes according to individual responsibility in following his Biblical word.

Above all, the authority of conservatism itself must be maintained. The country should be ruled by conservative values, and progressive values are seen as evil. Science should have authority over the market, and so

the science of global warming and evolution must be denied.

......................

Freedom is defined as being your own strict father - with individual not social responsibility, and without any government authority telling you what you can and cannot do. To defend that freedom as an individual, you will of course need a gun.

This is the America that conservatives really want. Budget deficits are convenient ruses for destroying American democracy and replacing it with conservative rule in all areas of life.

What is saddest of all is to see Democrats helping them.

Exactly Mr. Lakoff! There are too many Democrats and liberals elsewhere who haven't been paying attention to the overall strategy that has changed our way of life over the last 30 years. And those who don't want to live under a Christian version of Muslim theocracy better wake up to it while we are still able to have a say about it.

George Lakoff....welcome to la la land WIP. Thanks for that major load of bullshit, wip.

[Shady]

Is this a manifesto? I hope WIP isn't going to start mailing bombs to people now.

[bloodyminded]

WIP is, like myself, extremely...conservative (not in the ideological sense) when it comes to justifications for violence.

At any rate, it would be nice if, after his careful and relatively thoughtful post, someone could attempt an actual rebuttal, for purposes of debate.

[GWiz]

At any rate, it would be nice if, after his careful and relatively thoughtful post, someone could attempt an actual rebuttal, for purposes of debate.

Now while I freely admit I'm kinda new here and certainly don't know much about most of the people registered on this board I have to say that from what I've seen so far, the sensible and sound request you make, is darn near impossible to find here...

[bloodyminded]

Now while I freely admit I'm kinda new here and certainly don't know much about most of the people registered on this board I have to say that from what I've seen so far, the sensible and sound request you make, is darn near impossible to find here...

But there are exceptions. I've seen you yourself make a real effort.

Not every time...none of us can or should in every instance.

But when a reflective "think piece" is offered, an intelligent resposne would be nice. It doesn't even have to be friendly; just a genuine attempt to tackle the matter.

[Jack Weber]

But there are exceptions. I've seen you yourself make a real effort.

Not every time...none of us can or should in every instance.

But when a reflective "think piece" is offered, an intelligent resposne would be nice. It doesn't even have to be friendly; just a genuine attempt to tackle the matter.

I do have a response,however,I'm dealing with a cryptic con union buster at the moment...

[bloodyminded]

I do have a response,however,I'm dealing with a cryptic con union buster at the moment...

I understand.

I was referring to those who do offer comments, but have nothing to say and assiduously avoid debating the content.

[Jack Weber]

I understand.

I was referring to those who do offer comments, but have nothing to say and assiduously avoid debating the content.

I'm dealing with that level of obfuscation in the union busting thread...

[GWiz]

I'm dealing with that level of obfuscation in the union busting thread...

Hey I'm there with you guys but they're avoiding my post like the plague...

Edited February 19, 2011 by GWiz

[Shady]

I understand.

I was referring to those who do offer comments, but have nothing to say and assiduously avoid debating the content.

Oh, you mean like Jack in pretty much every thread he posts in!

[Jack Weber]

Hey I'm there with you guys but they're avoiding my post like the plaque...

I avoid plaque too...

Brushy,brushy...

[GWiz]

I avoid plaque too...

Brushy,brushy...

Mouthy!

[Jack Weber]

Mouthy!

I assume you know what RTW legislation is (Right to Work) and it's dupicitous,union busting nature??

Perhaps you can go over to that thread and discuss this because having a "discussion" with The Professor is like talking to a ...well...Y'know...

Edited February 19, 2011 by Jack Weber

[bush_cheney2004]

.....Exactly Mr. Lakoff! There are too many Democrats and liberals elsewhere who haven't been paying attention to the overall strategy that has changed our way of life over the last 30 years. And those who don't want to live under a Christian version of Muslim theocracy better wake up to it while we are still able to have a say about it.

I just love how the Americans dominate your political and ideological landscape. Now I truly understand why America is so important to some Canadians...and "our" way of life.

George P. Lakoff is an American cognitive linguist and professor of linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley, where he has taught since 1972.

[pinko]

He balances off morons like you. Which hillbilly state are you from?

[Shady]

George P. Lakoff

Hey, it's George Lakoff, rhymes with!!!

[Jack Weber]

More penile/masturbatory intimations from The Professor...

Deep...Thoughts...

[Bonam]

WIP is, like myself, extremely...conservative (not in the ideological sense) when it comes to justifications for violence.

At any rate, it would be nice if, after his careful and relatively thoughtful post, someone could attempt an actual rebuttal, for purposes of debate.

Just for you...

If there is one big reason why I bolted and left all of rightwing political thinking behind me, it was the gradual discovery over the last ten years that individual conservative and libertarian causes weren't making sense. There were all of these little paradoxes like:

why are rightwing capitalists who casually brush off poverty on the local and global level, so wound up about "unborn babies"....so wound up that they wave their general rules against government interference;

Well, I completely disagree with typical "right wing" views on abortion, but it should be obvious that from the perspective of someone who opposes abortion, there is a clear difference. Poverty is poverty: an economic matter, while abortion is viewed as killing/murder. Obviously, there are very valid argument to be made against the religious-right view of abortion, but comparing it to poverty is not one of them.

why are U.S. conservatives so concerned about every penny spend on domestic budgets, but change the subject quick when it comes to government spending on the military;

US military supremacy is critical to maintaining its current place in the geopolitical scheme of things. More importantly, the military (along with police, courts, and a few other services) is something that rightly can only be provided by government according to most/all conservative/libertarian philosophies, whereas most other services (health care, etc) are viewed as being reasonably capable of being provided by private sources.

how did Rightwing Christianity go from the traditional suspicious and hostile view of those who wealth to one that celebrates and revels in material wealth.

The marriage of the right wing with Christianity is a horrible idea, frankly, since they tended to have very little in common before. It is inherently full of contradictions. Right wing parties tend to represent a range of views: old school conservatives, libertarians, and religious conservatives. Each of these viewpoints had to compromise on things to fit into the same party. This is an inherent problem of any system where the political discourse is dominated by just a couple of parties.

These are just some of the mysteries of modern political/religious thinking that stopped making sense and cannot be explained as long as issues are compartmentalized into neat little categories: abortion, taxation, government spending, defense etc. An integrated view is necessary that examines the agenda behind the Conservative Movement and takes a look at what their goals are for transforming what they consider a secular, immoral society.

I agree... a political standpoint on a given issue should come from a big picture view of ethics, economics, etc. There are many positions held on both sides that do not seem like they could possibly have been arrived at from a consistent set of principles. For example, you may note the confusion among conservatives about how "liberals" could possibly claim to support, at the same time, women's rights, gay's rights, while advocating for tolerance of cultures that vehemently disagree with these rights and encourage immigration of people from parts of the world where women and gays are viewed as subhuman.

Despite this, people who do hold opinions that are consistently derived from a well-defined set of ideals are usually branded as "radicals".

Now, as for your quoted article... I got to here and then realized it was complete nonsense:

But where does that view of individual responsibility alone come from?...............

The way to understand the conservative moral system is to consider a strict father family. The father is The Decider, the ultimate moral authority in the family. His authority must not be challenged. His job is to protect the family, to support the family (by winning competitions in the marketplace), and to teach his kids right from wrong by disciplining them physically when they do wrong. The use of force is necessary and required. Only then will children develop the internal discipline to become moral beings. And only with such discipline will they be able to prosper. And what of people who are not prosperous? They don't have discipline, and without discipline they cannot be moral, so they deserve their poverty. The good people are hence the prosperous people. Helping others takes away their discipline, and hence makes them both unable to prosper on their own and function morally.

This, frankly, is a completely unsupported contention. While perhaps some few people derive their view of morality from a patriarchal ideal, I would guess that number is very small. Everything that follows in the article rests upon this completely flawed and unsupported thesis, and thus holds no validity.

Edited February 20, 2011 by Bonam

[bloodyminded]

I just love how the Americans dominate your political and ideological landscape. Now I truly understand why America is so important to some Canadians...and "our" way of life.

Canada dominates your thoughts.

[BubberMiley]

Canada dominates your thoughts.

I've been surprised recently by Americans' overall inferiority complex when it comes to Canada. You should have seen the comments on FoxNews when Justin Bieber said he prefers Canada's healthcare system.

[Shady]

I've been surprised recently by Americans' overall inferiority complex when it comes to Canada. You should have seen the comments on FoxNews when Justin Bieber said he prefers Canada's healthcare system.

I know! They were almost as bad as the comments found elsewhere when Justin Bieber said he thinks sex before marriage is wrong, and abortion is also wrong.

[Michael Hardner]

He balances off morons like you. Which hillbilly state are you from?

Why give up the argument by scuttling it so ?

[pinko]

Why give up the argument by scuttling it so ?

Today is a new day. What would you like to discuss?

[Michael Hardner]

Today is a new day. What would you like to discuss?

I'm just reading this thread... and was sorry to see you take your ball and go home with that insult...