Conservatives and Conservative Values

NOTE:  Cross Posted At Political Capital

Ah, moderates.  I've been hearing that term thrown around a lot lately, but unfortunately I haven't seen a great deal of exploration of the concept - instead it seems like the "go to" word when describing a faction of the party which is not of the socially conservative ilk. 

It is unfortunate that this article is necessary, but alas in many recent readings (such as here) I have come across descriptions of the friction within the Republican Party, and what has struck me has been the remarkable lack of understanding of basic political philosophy in not only the media, but in the right as well, including honestly grasping what a moderate is, and who exactly is about to "go to war" inside the right.

The upcoming “war for the soul of the GOP” as its being called lately is being described almost universally as “Moderates vs. social conservatives”.

::sigh::

First of all, lets get something straight - there are a lot more than just two factions within the Republican Party, and it is certainly a hell of a lot more in-depth than “moderates vs. conservatives”. Such descriptions hearken to the notion that politics is bi-polar, which is born of a two party system I suppose. You are apparently either left or right, or somewhere in the middle.

Sorry folks, but there is no "right" and "left" and "center".  Those concepts are artificial creations.  We keep hearing, "does the republican party need to go further right?" - but what are they asking?  Should the party go more right economically, socially or both?  If you go left on one and right on another, does that make you a "moderate"?  (no it doesn't)

Such descriptions, as I’ve noted before, are completely divorced from reality or critical thought. There are at lest four main “groups” of political thought across the landscape of political philosophy, popularized by the libertarian party’s two dimensional model of political thought. For the sake of reference, I’ll be referring to them as such:

• Authoritarians - Economic statism, Social statism
• Libertarians - Economic liberalism, Social liberalism
• Progressives - Economic statism, Social liberalism
• Conservatives - Economic liberalism, Social statism

This isn’t just a theory, this is more or less the general makeup of everyone’s political brain. Yes, there are variations on all of these things - I’ve met libertarians for example that range from isolationists to broad internationalists on foreign policy - but lets not use those fractures distract from the fact that most people fall in these general categories. We can deal with the dozen or so verifiable “strains” of Republicanism at another time, but for now, lets deal with the three main factions that we see competing - conservatives, libertarians, and true moderates. I say true moderates for a reason that I will outline below.

When somebody says the war within the Republican Party is “moderates vs. conservatives” - what in the living hell are they talking about?

The only thing they can be talking about is social policy and the culture wars.

Why? Because primarily the grassroots of the Republican Party is made up of a collection of conservatives and libertarians, both of whom agree on economic liberalism. Yes, I know the leaders of the party have acted like authoritarians - who cares? We know they don’t represent the actual grassroots of the party, so lets just set that aside and agree that nearly everyone in this country who would be predisposed to vote for a Republican would be either a libertarian or a conservative. But then again, there are the “moderates”.

So what is a moderate? A true moderate is somebody who can’t make up their damned mind and just blows with the wind on any and all issues. These are the real cancer within the party - the folks who conspire with Democrats to increase spending, expand entitlements, raise taxes, support earmarks, and the entire litany of state loving activities of the left. They do so because they see compromise on those government issues as “the center” and don’t want to be extreme. They do the same thing with social policy as well for the exactly same reason.

These are the people that need to be excommunicated from the party. These state loving, compromising, wishy washy, sail where the wind blows you lawmakers are the ones who don’t belong with us, and aren’t helping us anyway.

But it isn’t where the war within the party is going to be fought. True moderates as I just described are widely hated by everyone within our party - libertarians hate them because they compromise all freedom oriented principles, both economic and social, as they run to the politically safe road. Conservatives hate them because they tax and spend like Democrats, and they are much more liberal on social issues. I think we’re all on board with not liking these people.

But the coming war isn’t with this definition of moderates, which is the essence of my problem with the description I keep seeing in the media about the Republican schism.

No, the real war is between the culture warriors and the libertarians, about what role, and how much of a role, social issues will play in the Republican Party’s new strategy. Since both libertarians and conservatives are agreed on economic liberalism, this is the only place they can fight - but since the media needs to label something they don’t understand, they do the intellectually lazy thing and say it is “moderates” vs. “conservatives”.

I’m sorry, but moderates aren’t going to war with anyone. They’re out of the equasion, and to even bring up that label when discussing the future of the party is a dis-service to the conversation. If for no other reason that it irritates the living hell out of libertarians to be labeled as moderates, because they are moderate about nothing.

In any event, social issues is where the friction really is within the party - but the continual, inaccurate description of the conflict that is coming as “moderates vs. conservatives” feeds into the insanity that Soren Dayton talked about the other day - the idea being propagated by Rush Limbaugh and others that the problem with the party is that “true conservatives” have been betrayed, and that “moderates” have corrupted our core principles.

This gets us into people within the party labeling other people RINOs, when some of those “RINOs” are anti-government crusaders that would just as soon eliminate 10 executive departments, cut taxes by 20% across the board, and institute market reforms on every entitlement we have, but simply have a disagreement about the role of social warfare within our politics.

This is an ideological contest between people who want to almost exclusively fight the Republican political war on the culture battlefield vs. people who want to downplay the culture wars, and focus on what unifies the two camps, economic liberalism and good government reform.

Count me squarely with the libertarians in this fight - and not just because I am one. I, nor anyone in this camp is a “moderate” about anything - indeed I would argue it is likely I am more hawkish on economic liberalism and government reform than 95% of the Republican Party.

We simply see that stressing a message of economic freedom, low taxes, spending restraint, balanced budgets, government reform and a strong national defense are much more effective in uniting people across multiple regions than the culture wars are. Hell, I’m a religious person (Catholic), militantly pro-life, and I’m not exactly the biggest fan of the homosexual lobby, but that doesn’t mean I want that to be my sales pitch to the American people.

Many social conservatives that I know are in this line of thinking as well, because they recognize that no matter how “right” the Republican social agenda is, it remains divisive and will shrink the base of support of the party if it is the focus and lead argument for the party. Such fights may be appropriate to make - but by defining your movement by them, you give the impression that you aren’t really interested in serious governing, you simply want to use the government as a tool of social control.

For better or worse, my friends, people want to elect people they believe will be good stewards of government. They want it to be as efficient and minimalistic as it can be, they don’t want it to waste resources or profit on its existence, they want common sense, good solutions, they want their money protected, and they want to feel safe living in this country. They don’t like power being more important than protecting the people, and they want to trust.

That appeals to our common agreements between libertarians and conservatives. Moderates do in fact have a place, and I would not dream of throwing them out with the bathwater (no political party in a two party system competing with such an unbreakable wall in entertainment and education as the Democrats have, could ever hope to be viable without at least a few moderates) - but the real division in the party has nothing to do with moderates.

Ronald Reagan built an electoral model on unifying the splintered, broken and seemingly defeated Republican Party, and he didn’t do it by campaigning on a gay-marriage ban in the constitution. He did it by asking us to believe in ourselves, take individual responsibility, fight the growth and power of the Federal Government, and reform our most basic institutions so they serve the people.

Unifying narratives work.  If you think that somehow not fighting the social wars as a central theme of campaigning will somehow mean we cede those issues, or "give up" on them, you are a political novice.  Messages to voters that unify and inspire are what work - things that inherently divide us (like culture) do not work.  This is why Barack Obama has thrived on quite literally nothing.  He got people to buy into a message - and for better or worse, he portrayed it as a message of pragmatic unity. 

Well, the right has its own unifying message of common sense and pragmatism, and its about time we stopped sniping each other over social and cultural issues, and set out to push forward with a unifying message - such as what was done during the Reagan Revolution and the 1994 overthrow of Congress.  Those movements were about common sense, good government ideas, and a positive inspiring vision of America.

We've lacked "that vision thing" for quite some time now, and become little more than economic statists increasingly fighting one battle - culture.  Lets hit the reset buttom and understand not only what our common causes are, but what any random generic American - yes independents and democrats - can see about our agenda that they like.  Small government, reform, efficiency, and intelligence.

That is a message we can all come together on (hell, even the moderates can probably hop on board that train), and if the Republican Party had any sense left in it, this would be the focus of our party as we pick up the pieces from 2008. But more than that, we can’t just sell ourselves that way, we must behave that way once we regain power.

I for one am hoping that this is the consensus the party arrives at after the election. But for the love of all that is holy, lets stop speaking about ourselves as though there are “true conservatives” and “moderates”, because politics is not bi-polar, and the people being labeled as moderates are not moderate by any definition of the word.

Most of you know by now, I listen to Savage on the drive home. While the man is most definitely passionate in his beliefs, there is also a significant amount of truth in what he says.

I have been a Republican all my life. I would never consider being a democrat because a democrat is diametrically opposed to my core beliefs. I'm finding the Republican party is becoming as diametrically opposed as well. Savage promotes a foundation of border, culture and language--and I happen to agree. I also like his term--Independent Nationalist. I had thought about Independent Conservative (ICon) to describe myself, but IndNat'l seems to fit me better.

Remember--the biggest danger to the enemy within is a person who can think for themself.

Therefore, keeping the above in mind, I bring you Savage's Republican vs. Conservative:

Republicans vs. Conservatives

The voices of those who call themselves conservative are propagandizing the airwaves. You can hear the Golfer defending high gas prices as a necessary part of the free market, that there shouldn't be an FDA to protect us from salmonella, that illegal aliens are just doing the jobs Americans won't do, and attacking the minimum wage as being anti-job. This is garbage. These people are globalist liberals masquerading as free marketers. They have taken the Golfer's Kool-Aid. And more importantly, while they may be Republicans, they are most definitely not conservatives. I've said time and time again on this program that I'm a conservative, not a Republican. There's a huge difference between the two.

• Republicans are for AIDS money to Africa. Conservatives are for aid to working American citizens.
• Republicans are for letting the free market decide that $5 a gallon gas is OK. Conservatives are for compelling foreign oil producers to increase production and reduce prices, by force if necessary.
  
• Republicans are for bailing out billionaire money manipulators on Wall Street while you wait in line at the hospital behind an illegal alien. Conservatives are for letting Wall Street hucksters pay for their own mistakes and sending the illegal back to Mexico.
  
• Republicans are for letting market forces decide if your food has fecal matter in it. Conservatives are for enforcing basic food safety standards so that Mexican farm workers can't crap in the fields and make you sick.
  
• Republicans think bringing in illegal aliens is an amnesty. Conservatives think brining in illegal aliens is a travesty.
  
• Republicans want a strong global economy. Conservatives want a country. Republicans think that child porn on the internet is freedom from government. Conservatives know that smut is a poison that must be snuffed out.

America thought Bush was a conservative. He turned out to be just a Republican. And while there are Republicans who are conservatives, too, don't let the "R" after the name fool you. Let the voter – and the listener – beware.

Well worth thinking about, ladies and gentlemen. Are you a party lemming/sheeple or are you an indpendent thinker, capable of observing, researching and making your own decisions and acting upon those decisions?

I am lucky enough to have been able to vote for Ronald Reagan when he ran as President.  In fact, it was the first Presidential election in which I was old enough to vote and he was the very first President I voted for.

I was raised in a conservative family with strong conservative values--both parents had college degrees (at the time my father had his first of many PhD's), education was a MUST, we saved, my mother stayed home with us until we went to school and then she worked part time.  She was also responsible for our cultural and religious extra-curricular activities while daddy was responsible for our sports activities.  Hard work was rewarded with privileges, not toys and laziness, disrespect and irresponsibility were simply not tolerated.  I grew up in an era when children were kicked out of their houses around 8:00 am during the summer and told not to come home until lunch; after lunch, it was back outside until the street lights came on.  The entire neighborhood watched out for each other's children and if you got into trouble at a friend's house, your mother knew about it before you even came close to being home. Sunday Mass was MANDATORY and you dressed appropriately and respectfully. You learned what soap tasted like if you decided to try out your swearing capabilities. There was one TV in the house and the program lineup was decided by daddy.  Hence, my Star Trek addiction (it was on opposite the Flinstones at that time). Bedtimes were enforced, girls didn't call boys, and the phone better not ring after 8:00 pm unless it was a true emergency. We saved money for family vacations, there was one credit card and it was kept clear for emergency use only. We were taught the police were our friends and you ALWAYS stood for a member of the military.  From the time we could focus, we were plopped in front of the tv for each and every rocket launch and the flag was proudly flown from our home. Holidays centered around their meanings rather than the cost and number of gifts and our elders were very much respected.

Family vacations were rarely to anyplace other than the grandparents homes.  And such grandparents I had! One set of great-grandparents had actually pioneered parts of Colorado and Oklahome in covered wagons. They owned a small "farm" and were entirely self-sustaining.  Gruesome child that I was, I thoroughly enjoyed watching Grandpa execute chickens and ducks for dinner.  The pies my grandmother made were famous city-wide and she made a small contribution toward the family coffers selling her pies to the mom and pop restaurants in this small town. They raised six children in a sod hut; losing one in adulthood to a fire. To get a doctor, my grandmother had to literally run to town, find the doctor and go back to the homestead. They didn't have stores to buy sheets and such; quilting bees were the norm.  I have two of her quilts made into wall hangings for all to see their beauty. She emmigrated from Ireland and he was the son of German immigrants.

Another set of grandparents homesteaded the Idaho/Utah area.  She was a British immigrant whose father was a gravedigger in England and the children played among the headstones.  The highpoint of their childhood was going to the sea and eating ice cream.  She was an exceptionally cheerful woman who worked magic with a crochet hook or knitting needles.  She taught us how to can, preserve and store food.  My memories of my grandfather aren't so keen as he always seemed to be in the background. To her dying day, she had her afternoon tea.  Her three children were successes in their own rights, my father being the only son.

Those times are gone. The values have long been since relegated to the dustbins of obscurity as old fashioned and not relevant.

However.  These are the values of conservatives.  Self-sufficiency.  Using resources responsibly.  Helping each other out in time of need.  Saving for a rainy day.  Legal immigration and assimilation. Giving up native languages for English. Pride in God, country and self, in that order. Faith. Small government who trusted its citizens to pretty much govern themselves, stepping in only when necessary. Military service. Raising families to be productive citizens rather than lazy layabouts expecting everything to be handed to them.

These people were the backbone of the country and the backbone of the conservative base. They may have registered as Democrats.  They may have been Republicans. Either way, the values and beliefs were strong.

These values no longer define conservatism. Conservatism is used as an epithet these days, signifying you're hopelessly behind the times. God and Faith have been relegated to second class status, while the almighty dollar and power take their places.

Frankly, I'm tired of it.  I have my own blog.  Those who read my blog know I hold nothing back. I'm tired of what passes for the Republican party these days, which is nothing more than socialist lite. I'm tired of working my behind off to have my taxes taken (a nice form of armed robbery) to support the most ludicrous of leftist/liberal ideas and schemes, without asking me what I wish to support, whether it be policies or charities. I don't like my money being taken to support lunatic schemes such as the "greening" of the world, worshiping at the altar of Al Gore and designed to take my choice away regarding everything from what I put into my gas tank to what kind of light bulbs I use. Policies designed to siphon off my funds to support failed theories and false science which has been debunked by reputable research--yet the RNC panders to in order to get votes. Policies designed to drive up prices on everything from gas prices to the food on my table. Policies designed to ravage land and starve worldwide populations. Policies based upon the ravings of a lunatic and his followers.

I'm tired of the RNC pandering to the lobbies for illegal aliens and refusing to enforce existing laws against these invaders while continuing to try to find ways to shove anmnesty down my throat. I'm tired of the cowardice of the RNC in capitulating to the appeasement mentality of islamists demanding special accomodations for footbaths, prayer rooms and times, cafeterias and facility use times at publicly funded schools and universities, using my tax dollars, while my own Judeo-Christian values and needs are prohibited because of the "separation of church and state". I'm tired of the RNC appeasing a small percentage of the population's sexual issues by allowing them to force their views on my family through things like special sex ed classes and accomodation of Gay Pride parades and Folsom Street Fair. I'm tired of traitors and seditionists being allowed to retain their congressional seats rather than the RNC enforcing the laws against such behavior and prosecuting these criminals. I'm tired of the RNC becoming a yellow-belly, spineless wimp in the face of the liberal lunacy. I'm tired of the RNC asking me for money to support candidates who waffle, spin, refuse to take a stand and are nothing more than democrat lite, while refusing to provide us true conservative candidates.

I'm plain tired of the RNC.  I will stay registered Republican just long enough to get through this election; then I'm registering no party.  I will not continue to contribute to or support any candidate run by a party I no longer recognize and a party who insists on ignoring the voices of the people.

Anyone with me?