April 23, 2010

The conservative mind

A good discussion and an earnest snark-free one going on out there in the blog world about what happened to the conservative mind. How did conservatives go from William F. Buckley to Sarah Palin? How did they go from thoughtful and intellectual discourse to death panels and discussions comparing Obama's ACA to Hitler's Gestapo? A particularly good essay on this subject is this one from Noah Millman.

I am not sure who closed it, but I am quite convinced it is closed or closing. When serious conservatives around me defend the Tea Party as a legitimate voice that needs to be heard, I know that there is something seriously wrong. The Tea Party, which the Times poll showed this last week, is anti-government and wants government out of their lives, except for Medicare and Social Security which they want left alone. As I told a conservative friend this week, they aren't anti-government services, they just resent those government services going to, you know, other people. Given that the same poll said this group believes that government is spending far too much time on the needs of black people, you don't have to look to far to identify the "others."

Don't ask me to respect such rhetoric.

But back to the conservative mind, I do see a few examples of why it is closing. Millman talked about the trend of exiling dissenters, and you only have to check in with the NRO to see it in action. Jim Manzi, who I had not read, but who is respected as a conservative critic of climate change legislation, turned his criticism against Mark Levin, and found himself in deep trouble with the right wingers. Most interesting to me was the fact that many of Levin's supporters decided that Manzi was a liberal or even a Marxist. This reminds me of how Andrew Sullivan and Bruce Bartlett immediately ceased being conservative when they dissented from Bush's policies.

And of course, we cannot talk about the closing of the conservative mind without considering my old friends in the conservative evangelical movement. I found this ABC report video quite interesting. Turns out a prominent conservative evangelical admitted that evolution could no longer be denied. I think his line was something like, "if we ignore facts in front of us, we become a cult."

I will leave it to you to imagine the response. The conservative mind hasn't always been closed. But it is pretty well shut right now to anything that doesn't fit their version of the world. Facts, as Colbert noted, have a well-known liberal bias.

I have to admit a bit of schadenfreude when I observe this from conservatives. As a Democrat who would prefer to win more elections than we lose, I should like this. A closed Republican mind bodes well for that Democratic electoral outlook. But it bodes extremely poorly for the country as a whole. It is hard for me, by the way, to imagine any candidate the GOP could put forward who would concede the science on climate change, or the mountain of evidence behind evolution. I find it hard to imagine a GOP candidate who would dare raise taxes even as the deficit soars, and state budgets implode, or who would dare to teach birth control.

All of those are bad for our national mind. I would prefer a real opposition party with intellectual legitimacy.

9 comments:

leighton said...

I also don't like this, even though few things could be better for Democrats' electoral prospects. It's like winning the championship because all the members of the other team were suspended for driving on sidewalks and maiming pedestrians. There are better ways to win.

Of course, government is higher stakes than sports, and there's also the complicating factor that I only vote Democrat because there are only two parties with any hope of electing Senators, and one of the parties has policy you would expect to get from residents of a psych ward rather than residents of Capitol Hill.

steves said...

I think it is still open, you just have to know where to look. Part of this comes from the rise of pseudo conservative populists like Limbaugh, Hannity, and Savage. They appeal to lazy people that want talking points and don't want to have to think about the issues.

Facts, as Colbert noted, have a well-known liberal bias.

I chuckle at this. The truth is what it is an liberals can be close minded when it comes to some issues. I just can't get into Colbert and can only stand him for a few minutes.

This reminds me of how Andrew Sullivan and Bruce Bartlett immediately ceased being conservative when they dissented from Bush's policies.

I think the only person that thought Sullivan was conservative was Sullivan. I am only an occasional reader, but I don't see it.

Streak said...

Sullivan voted for Bush in 2000 and defended the Iraq war and tax cuts. He certainly isn't conservative on gay rights, but on many other issues is pretty consistent. But my broader point about Bartlett and others stands, I think.

As for the conservative mind being open, several have suggested that to be true, but the fact that you have to look for those open minds confirms the broader issue. It isn't just the Limbaughs and Becks, it is the entire leadership in the GOP delegation. Those moderates find themselves as a small minority. Hell, look at Lindsey Graham, hardly a liberal, but because he wants to work with Democrats on climate change, the base has decided that not only is he not really conservative, but he must also be gay.

The truth is what it is an liberals can be close minded when it comes to some issues.

That isn't really the point here, is it? Are we back to saying that both sides are bad? The issue here isn't the fact that both sides have blind spots, but that one group has embraced their blind spot.

C.D. said...

If evolution is true, what are you liberals worried about? Everything now happening, including "climate change", is just as natural as if something different were happening. And everything that has happened in the past means no more than whatever will happen in the future.

Streak said...

And everything that has happened in the past means no more than whatever will happen in the future.

Sigh. What a moron.

steves said...

The issue here isn't the fact that both sides have blind spots, but that one group has embraced their blind spot.

Really. At least on the regional level, I can think of a few stances that the liberal environmentalists have taken that ignored science and engineering that were embraced by many on the left. I am not arguing that both sides are the same, but you can't reasonably say that the entire platform of the left is based on reason.

Streak said...

Ok. Fair enough. I think the irrationality on the right is a much bigger problem right now, but I see your point.

steves said...

I would agree that the Right currently is cranking out more hyperbole, bullshit, and lies than the Left. If the election were held today I would probably vote straight ticket Democrat at the national level.

Bob said...

"I can think of a few stances that the liberal environmentalists have taken that ignored science and engineering that were embraced by many on the left."

Word.

Even a group called the the Union of Concerned Scientists seem to struggle with engineering and the laws of Physics.