The last few years (ok, the last 30) it’s become increasingly hard for me to put the traditional definition of “conservative” together with the actions of those who now call themselves conservatives.
The American Republican party (which is generally considered the conservative party — though in reality it is only one of the several political parties in this country that espouse conservative doctrine) used to behave in a pretty intelligent and rational fashion (to me, that is — purely subjective observation), but that was before mega-corporations, before the days of Newt Gingrich, before the fundamentalist wave moved into politics, before many things.
Then there was the “neo-conservative” movement. Then the “tea-baggers”(1). Then the “neo’s” came back again, in an almost new form, and so on. When combined with other behaviors (especially the more belligerent and propaganda-ish ones), one finally has to ask, “what are they conserving?”
Me, I’ve assumed that they simply don’t know the actual meaning of the term conservative. As in, 1) it’s primarily a fiscal term, 2) it also means to keep the status-quo, 3) it’s also a term used as in “conservation of the natural world,” or “musical conservatory” 4) it’s also a sweetened fruit spread much like jam, and so on, several more meanings and very closely related words. They further seem to take it as “protect what was against all odds, whether that’s a rational action or not.”(2)
A friend of mine puts it this way.
What are they conserving? Their beliefs about what life was when everything was “as it should be.” Really. They have a set of beliefs about the 1950s, before overpopulation, before instant worldwide communication, before the consequences of DDT, radiation, and smog were understood, before women said “enough of this post-war confinement to the home,” before church was deemed irrelevant by the educated elite, and that’s what they want to go back to.
I would take that to mean “the conservatives are hanging on a picture of an ideal world that in truth never existed.” Meaning, the answer to the question “what are they conserving” is unanswerable in the real world as they are trying to “hang on to” or “return to” something that was never actually real.
That is not conservative. It’s delusional.
For reference, I also plan a matching posting about the so-called “liberals”(3)
I’m sentimental, if you know what I mean
I love the country but I can’t stand the scene
And I’m neither left or right
I’m just staying home tonight
Getting lost in that hopeless little screen
But I’m stubborn as those garbage bags
That Time cannot decay
I’m junk but I’m still holding up
This little wild bouquet
Democracy is coming to the USA
~ From Leonard Cohen’s Democracy is coming to the US
(1) Which is actually an extremely graphic and potentially offensive term (certainly among the conservatives, one would think!), but apparently they didn’t know what it means when they adopted it to describe themselves. Probably they took it from the classic tale of tossing the Tea overboard at Boston Harbor, in protest of “the Crown.” I can remember news anchors of the time almost choking with suppressed laughter, trying to get through the news story — they, apparently, knew what the term more commonly meant, even if the self-proclaimed “tea-baggers” did not.
(2) Trust me, I have just as many cutting remarks about the so-called liberals as I have about the so-called conservatives. I am not tearing down anyone in particular, nor am I promoting anyone in particular. Just observing in my own odd way…
(3) By the way, “liberal” is not a dirty word. It is not a criminal. It is not some one who wants to take your guns away. It’s not an elitist. It’s not some one who wants your family to starve instead of letting you cut down a tree. None of that is what “liberal” means, but that’s what the so-called conservatives would have you believe. More on that in another posting. Soon to follow.