Conservative, Liberal, Principled

The Washington Post ^ | March 29, 2005 | E. J. Dionne Jr.

[neverdem]

Liberals have so little respect for conservatives these days that people on the left are genuinely astonished when people on the right have principled disagreements with each other. The left assumes the right marches in lock step under orders from the White House.

Conservatives have so little respect for liberals that they see every liberal action as inspired by hatred of President Bush, opposition to religion and contempt for people in "the heartland."

The paradoxical result of this mutual contempt is that each side is simultaneously underestimated and overestimated. As a result, current political arrangements are seen as permanent and the possibilities of political change are missed -- even when change is in the process of happening.

The right is widely assumed to have more coherence and discipline than it does. That means its dominance in our politics is exaggerated while its intellectual energy is insufficiently appreciated. Few outside its ranks acknowledge how many philosophical streams feed the conservative movement.

The left is widely assumed to be in a state of a perpetual disarray, inspired mostly by knee-jerk responses such as "political correctness" or "radical secularism." For at least a decade now, conservatives have gleefully called their political foes "reactionary liberals" whose main task, they say, is the preservation of a New Deal-Great Society status quo. Since the 2004 election gave narrow but firm control of Washington's two elected branches of government to a Republican Party committed to conservatism, the dominant political narrative has highlighted the right's effectiveness and the left's fecklessness.

Yet the liberals' opposition to many of Bush's policies -- in particular his Social Security program and his tax cuts for the wealthy -- cannot be dismissed as a blind rejection of whatever this controversial president proposes. If there is a principle that unites the left side of...

[Unam Sanctam]

Conservatives have so little respect for liberals that they see every liberal action as inspired by hatred of President Bush, opposition to religion and contempt for people in "the heartland."

And it seems to me that this is a very accurate reflection of what drives the Left.

[MNnice]

"Few outside its ranks acknowledge how many philosophical streams feed the conservative movement."

And who do we have to blame for this ignorance, Mr. Dionne?

[Optimist]

liberals' opposition to many of Bush's policies -- in particular ... tax cuts for the wealthy -- cannot be dismissed as a blind rejection of whatever this controversial president proposes.

Another example of "factual journalism" as practiced by the "unbiased" WP

[NutCrackerBoy]

Dionne Jr.'s choice of words betray his loyalties. He can barely keep the saliva controlled when he writes of possible Republican troubles.

Still, it's an interesting read. I take issue with the following: The traditionalists' main concern is the preservation of traditional values, including family values, and Social Security violates none of these. I think there's a growing realization that the nanny state is a death knell for religion.

[vpintheak]

The left and principles? Pahlease!

[Mr_Moonlight]

liberals' opposition to many of Bush's policies -- in particular ... tax cuts for the wealthy -- cannot be dismissed as a blind rejection of whatever this controversial president proposes.

Optimist wrote: "Another example of "factual journalism" as practiced by the "unbiased" WP"

Bingo! The bold highlighted words says it all about which side this columnist E.J. Dionne gets his bread buttered from

[Democratshavenobrains]

This is a pretty accurate column by Dionne. Some conservatives do make the mistake by thinking that hating Bush is behind everything liberals do.

[newfarm4000n]

I thought it was a pretty decent column .

[BackInBlack]

Well, it's not as if the Left wasn't basically the same before Bush. They've been doing the same garbage for years.