Romney is a troll and a sycophant, which was very apparent
to me early in the debate cycle. Those feelings did reach a pinnacle the other
day when the video of him debasing 47% of Americans was released. But, I initially
could not get a handle on why he angered me so much beyond his stupid indifference
to people. One surely should not have been surprised by his country club on
steroids attitude.
Balancing political and philosophical differences between people
is one of those things that makes America great and can make you hairless. There
has been much hyperbole and rhetoric the past couple of days from the left and
much of it appeals to visceral distaste for Romney’s comments, but there is
much more sinister stuff going on here. I realized my displeasure is with a
combination of Romney the man and the vision of the people that support him…let
me explain.
Republicans and Democrats are liberals. America has always
been a liberal state. But most Democrats are Liberals because of the
implications of the values both hold. Republicans are liberals but not Liberals.
It has become fashionable to refer to themselves as Conservatives; most
Republicans are not Conservatives.
Both Democrats and Republicans maintain that there are
certain inexorable values that a liberal society maintains to justify the
structure and nature of its institutions. The Declaration of Independence
states that “all men are created equal…endowed by their creator with certain
unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of
Happiness.”
A slight digression; Most Americans take pride in the
Declaration of Independence and all for which it stands but not all Americans
supported the view that Rights are divinely granted. Most secular people no doubt
lean toward the Liberal arm of the Democratic Party, which maintains that reason
guided by a sense of Justice and Fairness is the source of Rights.
Liberals see a just society as one that provides its members with certain
Rights about which reasonable people may disagree but certain values are prior,
e.g., Freedom and Equality. Many Traditional Conservatives are secular and as I
will discuss to do not believe in divinely inspired Rights. They do believe,
however, that there are no special or prior rights, all reasonable values are
equally important, and a matter for conversation.
As one might expect, defining these unalienable Rights and finding
consensus for their implications is no easy task. But these are certain Rights
that all liberals, Democrats and
Republicans maintain belong to a free and equal people.
What is difficult and creates the tension is that there is a
world of difference in what, for example, Republicans and Democrats mean by
equality. This problem is also compounded by the fact that some of these values
are mutually exclusive…meaning the implementation of one necessary effects the
implementation of the other.
One can easily imagine that the concept of equality is a difficult
contentious concept to define; do we mean equality of outcome or equality of
opportunity? Few would disagree with the idea of equality of opportunity. But
Liberals and Republicans strongly differ over the implications for equality of
outcome: Republicans, for the most part, believe our society should maximize
the right of freedom by assuring only a framework: security and safety broadly
understood so a person may be as free as possible pursue her goals; Equality of
Opportunity. There is a plurality of reasonable conceptions of a good life, it is
not the government’s job to tell her what goals she should pursue or provide her
the resources necessary to achieve those goals; it is her personal
responsibility.
Democrats also believe that the government should not tell a
person what goals to pursue but they acknowledge that a large part of the
success or failure she has in attaining her goals has to do with her starting
place in life. There is such a disparity in the starting places between those
with resources and those without and since success is so skewed in favor of
those with more resources, that this inequality requires some adjustment. Equality means and Justice requires government to reallocate resources to those that
are less fortunate through no fault of their own, to make up for this inequity.
Since our government has no resources of its own, so goes the Republican story,
the reallocation of assets from those citizens that have more to those that
have less is an infringement on their God given Right of Freedom; mutually
exclusive concepts.
Conservatism is also not easily defined as there a many
types of conservatives. Some like Edmund Burke believed that conservatism is an
attitude more than a political philosophy. We live in a society, within a
certain framework, and given that our society is a good society, we need to preserve
its framework broadly understood. Traditional Conservatives are motivated by
the belief that there are not unlimited resources and that a society benefits
by best using its limited resources for those that have the best chance of
enabling its future success. They also do not believe in a set of authoritative
values. For them, a good society fosters an environment of equal values that enables
members of the society to adopt their set of reasonable values so they may
obtain their reasonable conception of a good life.
It follows that Traditional Conservatives (secular
conservatives) believe in limited government and freedom and personal responsibility
but not necessarily because God endowed Americans with certain unalienable Rights.
This is not to say that there are not religious Conservatives who believe in
the divine story. I would suggest that most Americans who consider themselves
Conservatives are of the religious persuasion as is the base of the Republican Party,
as represented by its platform.
But, I think this is why Republicans frequently call
themselves Conservatives and not necessarily the other way around. It also
explains why many Conservatives align with the Republican Party because of professed
Republican belief in limited government and freedom and personal responsibility
over the implications for social values held by Democrats. But I also contend
that given the Democrat’s willingness to acknowledge that reasonable people can
reasonably disagree, at the least, Traditional Conservatives would better serve
themselves politically by aligning with the Democratic Party and having that
debate; at least society will move forward upon consensus.
Non-religious people are generally not inflexible because
even if they hold a position strongly, they hold it because of the arguments or
reasons supporting their views. They are, in their opinion, the best arguments
for the position they hold. Their views are not entrenched and held because of faith
or divine intervention…if someone could provide a better argument for the nature
and structure of society, they are predisposed to listen and discuss.
This brings me to what angered me about Romney’s candid
moment in the video. Romney and his
party is guided by very strong religious views not the least of which is that their
rights are God given and that God has told them what the only implications are
of the Rights He has granted.
Their belief that they are divinely inspired, by definition,
makes them unreasonable and intransigent people. God is infallible and so there
is no conversation to have. Consequently, because their views and visions come
from divine inspiration, they become intransient, there is no conversation to be had. In other words, Republicans, just
think they are right and their world-vision divinely inspired provides them
with no reason to be flexible and negotiate the implication of the values they
claim to hold so dearly. It makes the
debate between the left and right intractable; actually and unfortunately a waste of time.
Mitt Romney, on the hand, believes in nothing and everything
at the same time. One might think that
is a contradiction. But Romney, with the aid of his Etch-A-Sketch denies all
that came before and then calmly morphs between/to the world where lives among his
fellow trolls and returns to behave like the sycophant he is. We can only hope this all
catches up with him and some reality sets in with the voting public.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments now Powered by Disqus