Tweet
Do Conservatives conserve…?
Due to my long attendance here at the FDL, I have been longing to have an academic discussion on “Do Conservatives conserve…?” by the many smart and intelligent participants, and yet, my longing will not be addressed, and which I will find to be quite understandable.
For the many of us, “mental masturbation” is not our forte, since we much prefer the “unassailable” Fact and intentionally discard the wealth of propaganda and which today passes for the conventional wisdom.
Take, for example, my “reality” here in my home state of Arizona, the formerly Grand Canyon State, and now the “Kick Me!” state demonstrates this reality can only be addressed by a re-invigorated voting public doing the decision-making. And not found in the ‘back-room’ or in the cloak room deals.
To wit, my reality is this: In Arizona’s state legislature, legislation is seeking out the requisite votes–both chambers have a Republican-led Super-Majority, and with the Governor being Republican and leading to a possible ‘slam dunk’ and in which if a vote is eventually taken, all public-owned lands, municipal, county, state, and federal, will have this “ownership” move out of the hands of the general public/voters, as such, the voters, and into the hands of the state legislature for its obvious decision-making. And this onerous and disgusting behavior, if successful, future generations have nothing to look forward to, and due to this political attack, is being led by the resource-extractive and the land development industries.. And by way of background, my home state–Arizona, consists of 75% “public lands.” Consequently, the Grand Canyon will become a uranium playground and the Rez will become “privatized.”
Now, I can challenge the “conservative” or for more precision, I can challenge the “extremist” conservative, and I still would not get an acceptable response, since we are all familiar with the Three D’s and which are representative for Diversion, Distraction and Denial. Therefore, I refuse to approach my politics from the standpoint of the historical dentist with a pair of pliers in hand and for any an ambitious effort for “pulling teeth.” As such, I am looking forward to what the Future will bring and brought about by the Progressive meme and effort.
Therefore, feel free to weigh in and provide the requisite “illumination.” And if not, obviously, you won’t be wasting your invaluable time or your prodigious skill set for writing and as I would expect.
Jaango
4 Comments
First, we need to agree on terms.
I struggle with labels nowadays because they have lost all meaning.
As a nation, we consider a “Liberal” today to mean “moderate Conservative” (Obama is more conservative than Nixon; his supporters are in a similar camp).
Do you mean conservative with a capital “C” (Tea Party, extremists, evangelicals); or are you including conservatives with a small “c” (centrists + so-called “moderates” (like Snowe)).
This ain’t all that complicated, mislabeling is not an issue to resolve in order to answer the question.
Conservatives conserve, for themselves, at the expense of all others.
And in the land of the uniparty owned and operated by the 1% corporate fascist, all political ideals are conservative, regardless of label.
Next?
Yes. They con the people and serve corporate interests. Con. Serve.
To: Jest, Larue, and storyofo,
To each of you, I owe a big apology, for not attending to this thread, once posted. I was called away to an unscheduled meeting in Tucson, and it wasn’t till late last night that I returned, and being tired, caught up on my Zzz’s.
But, now I am ready, and of course, a tad of ‘background’ is necessary, for my approach to an academic discussion, of sorts.
First. I avoid using the label of Tea Party, since this is a front group and created to take away the attention and onus on the Bush/Legacy for the Era of Gross Incompetence. However, when stripping away the “pleasant” camouflage from the Right, what I find is that their hate and anger for “winning at any cost” comes forth and can no longer be disguised. Therefore, the language of “Nationalism” is prevalent and can not be ignored and discounted. And which brings me to my more ‘detailed’ background.
Second, in the Chicano Movement of the 1960s and 1970s, and for those of us engaged, the language of “Nationalism” came forth, and thusly, “fighting” this nationalism required that an ever-present language was required, and when applied the advocates of nationalism, would quickly retreat back into their ‘pleasant’ camouflage. To wit, this nationalism is easily found in the Plan de Atzlan and which was created by the J.Edgar Hoover and his amenable-Mormon-Troopers, via the COINTELPRO. Needless to say but I will, this Plan was inserted into the Chicano Movement via the local artifice in Denver, and who was an informant of many years for the FBI. And since he couldn’t keep his zipper zipped, ala Clinton, his mistress did him in and as, a “negotiated” informant status came about. Further, there is always a presumption that the political allie will eventually prove to an “informant” and one acts accordingly, and remains above the law for political engagement. In summary, there was virtually no “organized” violence in the Chicano Movement. The closest to this “organized” was the Los Angeles Police when they shot and killed a reporter covering a large demonstration, and where the bullut went through a plate glass window and into an eating establishment where this reporter was enjoying his repast. In summary, the “second” feature for political engagement is to have a healthy respect for Mayors, since they ‘control’ law enforcement, and they-law enforcement, understand well the ‘code-talk’ that politicians utilize for ‘bending’ and beneficial to the big campaign donors as in jeopardizing the sidewalks and entryways to business establishments.
And Third are Ideas. At the State Legislature, the extremists when compared to and prior to the Reagan Era for Criminal Stupidity, are now attempting to abolish the State Land Department, but the environmentalists are not going ‘quietly into the night’ since public parks and Environment Preserves are facing elimination. The legislature has reduced funding to public parks and in no small measure. And land developers are on ‘standby’ for greater profiteering since municipalities are not edging up to the multiplicity of Rezs. Consequently, the ‘next’ regimen of tax cuts will kick in next year for land developers, and bated breath dictates, more and larger profiteering.
With the Legislature’s effort to ‘privatize’ public lands for the benefit of Rightist politicians and their cronyies, the rubric of “state’s right” will resurface given that federally=owned lands are on the ‘decision-making’ table. And should any of this political and legal shenanigans go before the SCOTUS, we, the “little guys’ waging this poliltically engineered public policy fiasco, will require a much greater understanding of the extremist’s strategy for ‘winning at any cost.’
Jaango