Conservatism's death throes?

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Stephanie, Nov 13, 2006.

  1. Stephanie
    Offline

    Stephanie Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Messages:
    70,236
    Thanks Received:
    10,817
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +27,359
    Posted: November 13, 2006
    1:00 a.m. Eastern

    Editor's note: This is the first of a two-part series on the failure of conservatism as an ideology for moving America forward with a positive agenda for expanding freedom and reviving morality and restoring justice.


    The conservative mantra about the Republican drubbing in the midterm congressional elections is: "Conservatives didn't lose, Republicans did."
    With all due respect to my conservative friends, this is the kind of thinking that will take them the way of the Whigs.

    Don't get me wrong. I love conservatives. Some of my best friends are conservatives. But being "conservative" is not a bold vision for the future. Being "conservative" will never inspire Americans to reject socialism and immorality. Banking on this word, this wholly inadequate, timid ideology is, instead, a sure-fire recipe for political defeat for the foreseeable future.

    Conservatives are both right and wrong in their critique of Republicanism in 2006.

    It's true that Republicans did not distinguish themselves from their Democratic counterparts. It's true that Republicans did nothing to hold on to their political base. It's true that Republicans governed just like Democrats.

    But, I have to tell you, "conservatism" is not the recipe for taking America back. It won't work.

    There are three fundamental problems with conservatism:


    It is a defensive movement rather than offensive;

    Its exclusive field of battle is electoral politics;

    It lacks the vision of a better future;
    America is sliding inevitably toward socialism and immorality. I'm not going to call the direction we're moving "liberalism," because that description is simply too kind and understates the seriousness of our crisis and the lateness of the hour.

    Forget about who won Congress. Look at the way Americans voted on issues.

    While it's true that marriage amendments passed in all but one state – Arizona – the closeness of all those tallies is what disturbs me. It persuades me that the conservative agenda is an agenda that just keeps losing ground.

    You would think that amendments simply declaring marriage to be an institution between one man and one woman would garner at least 90 percent support among Americans.

    Yet, even in four states in which the amendment passed, opposition exceeded an astounding 40 percent of the vote.

    Conservatives look at those numbers and see victory. I've got news for you: So do the same-sex marriage activists. I look at those numbers and see inevitable defeat. It might be in 2008 or 2010 or 2012. But the die is cast. There is no question that the American view of marriage is changing.

    The defensive agenda of conservatives is failing – and it will continue to fail. And this is just one example of hundreds in the way it is failing.

    It's time for conservatives to realize the problem is not limited to the Republican Party. There is something inherently inadequate with the conservative vision.

    Let me put it to you this way: After Nancy Pelosi and Charles Rangel and John Conyers have their way with America, will you, as a conservative, be satisfied with preserving or conserving what's left of America?

    I'm not even content with that prospect right now – before they take the country further down their slippery slope of moral relativism and tyranny.

    At some point, and I believe we're long past that point, "conserving" the vestiges of American institutions will no longer be adequate. I think we've already lost way too much freedom and morality. We need a counter-revolution to restore them – not an effort to save what's left.

    Let me illustrate what is happening this way: Imagine American politics as a tug of war. One side in the battle is actually playing to win – to pull its opponents into the moat. The other side, though, is simply trying not to get pulled into the moat.

    Who is inevitably going to win? Which political ideology do you think is represented by the team whose goal is a standoff?

    I know this is hard to understand because no one else – and I mean no one – is saying what I am saying.

    Like it or not, the very nature of the word "conservative" defines the ideology. It is not a radical movement to expand freedom and economic opportunity. It is not a radical movement to restore justice and morality. It is not a radical movement to achieve victory over evil.

    Instead, it is a "conservative," defensive movement that is merely content standing still.

    Unfortunately, in the history of the world, there is no such thing as a social movement that stands still. You are either moving toward your goal or moving away from it.

    What are the conservatives' goals? Let's say "preserving marriage" is one of them. The way conservatives fight to achieve their status quo goal is to get marriage amendments on ballots. At first they win one referendum after another. Conservatives see victory at hand – even though, if they are 100 percent successful, all their hard work and sacrifice will have gone to the goal of achieving the status quo.

    Meanwhile, the other side doesn't worry too much about those votes. Instead, they are fighting in a whole different arena – the battle for the hearts and minds of the American people using the cultural institutions of the press, the entertainment industry, the foundations, the corporations, even the churches.

    That's why each successive vote on marriage amendments is a little closer. Their goal is the destruction of the very building block of western civilization – the traditional family.

    The American people have been softened up and are starting to believe that marriage between same-sex couples is perfectly normal and acceptable – a notion that would have been anathema to them 20 years ago.

    This is an illustration of the inadequacy of the conservative agenda.

    It's hard to accept for conservatives who have placed so much faith in this ideology of defeat.

    "Are you saying, Farah, that conservatism can never triumph?" you might ask. "What about Ronald Reagan?"

    It's a good question. Conservatism does have its momentary political triumphs. They can occur when life under socialism and immorality becomes intolerable for people. If conservatism is packaged well and articulated by an articulate and passionate personality, it can win at the polls – no question about it.

    Yet the cultural march toward socialism and immorality continues unabated – just as it did during the Reagan years.

    If you think there is even a grain of truth in what I am saying today, I urge you to read my book, "Taking America Back," where I have the opportunity to expand on these ideas.

    TOMORROW: A glimpse of a radical new agenda for the future.
    http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52927

    What do you think?
     
  2. Mr.Conley
    Offline

    Mr.Conley Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,958
    Thanks Received:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    New Orleans, LA/Cambridge, MA
    Ratings:
    +116
    He's wrong.
     
  3. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511
    Conservatism is a bold vision. THe problem is conservatism has come to mean naked coporate favoritism, and a globalist vision, one in which people are enslaved irrevocably by the corporate machine.
     
  4. Hobbit
    Offline

    Hobbit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2004
    Messages:
    5,099
    Thanks Received:
    420
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Near Atlanta, GA
    Ratings:
    +421
    No, the problem is that conservatism keeps getting abandoned in favor of power-grabbing idiocy such as pandering to the uneducated or to large businesses.
     
  5. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511

    What is the specific pander that's the pander to the uneducated, within the republican party?
     
  6. Nienna
    Offline

    Nienna Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    4,515
    Thanks Received:
    333
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +333
    The problem with conservativism is that we have erred so far from the founding principles of the nation that even conservatives don't know what we are supposed to conserve.

    I don't want to be a conservative any more... I want to be a "restorative."
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511

    Yes. We have accepted the globalist delusion that somehow we don't have a horse in this race, that increasing profits it's positive regardless of possible devastation to mankind, physically, morally, or spiritually.

    Can't we as conservatives remember a time when unions were necessary, when children worked? Didn't we as a society put limits on commerce due to other standards of society? Why are we now told that profit justifies slave labor in china? or it contributes to stablility? Accept slave labor because it contributes to stability? What kind of christian would accept this? Yet trade with china is nearly off the table, because it's a foregone conclusion that it's a MUST DO for both corrupt parties.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,537
    Thanks Received:
    8,161
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,152
    Actually, I think he is right to a point. And his example of the same sex marriage bans is key.

    The fact that we have to make laws preserving it is evidence that we are losing the culture war. If we were winning the war, we wouldnt have to make it a law.

    And if we can't find a way to successful face this culture war and win we will be in trouble.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. Bonnie
    Offline

    Bonnie Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    9,476
    Thanks Received:
    668
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Wherever
    Ratings:
    +669
    Yes!!!
     
  10. Hobbit
    Offline

    Hobbit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2004
    Messages:
    5,099
    Thanks Received:
    420
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Near Atlanta, GA
    Ratings:
    +421
    There's "There's no way we can handle this illegal problem except by granting all the lawbreakers citizenship," and "Look at all this pork I brought home for you, my constituents," not to mention, "The best way we can enhance education is by making it illegal to leave people behind when they're lazy or stupid, letting them drag down the rest of the class."
     

Share This Page