Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Tax-chick; grey_whiskers
"Conservative" and "Liberal" are largely meaningless terms across any temporal boundary.

What was liberal twenty years ago is now moderate and what was conservative twenty years ago is now fascist. As I mentioned in our discussion on the NC board, liberal has largely been co-opted for something nearly diametrically opposed to its original meaning. Conservative is even worse. I offer that conservative as a political descriptor doesn't even last a full generation. Ten or fifteen years ago, any introduction of neocons, let alone "crunchy" cons into a serious political discussion on the right would have met (rightfully so) with utter derision.

To that end, Dr. Sowell's use of the terms, "anointed" and "unenlightened," as well as his characterizations of the constrained and unconstrained visions are as locally accurate as and far more temporally durable than "conservative" or "liberal." The only trouble with them is that they require a lot of overhead. I guess that's the cost of avoiding the blurring that goes along with colloquial understanding.

Adopting stricter attitudes toward diet and health, more liberal modes of dress, and communing with nature does not a political stance make. It is the fact that those we call liberal behave in these ways as a collective imperative that makes the political statement. It is when one attempts to impose the behavior on others by governmental fiat that makes a political statement. Once one has begun to abet the process of banning tobacco and trans-fats and driving with cell phones in order to impose one's vision of "the greater good" on one's neighbors, every bit of conservatism, as we know it now, is long gone.
43 posted on 10/03/2006 6:56:48 PM PDT by NCSteve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]


To: NCSteve
Dinner time!

Beef stroganoff (again) with beer.

Will reply later tonight; and THEN get back to my 2nd vanity...

Cheers!

45 posted on 10/03/2006 7:16:31 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]

To: NCSteve
Virtually every word of your most excellent post agrees with what I think. :-)

Let's recap. I've been on the crevo threads and it's nice to find someone to *agree with* for a change.

Ten or fifteen years ago, any introduction of neocons, let alone "crunchy" cons into a serious political discussion on the right would have met (rightfully so) with utter derision.

Minnesota's own Hubert Humphrey (a flaming liberal in his day) would now be derided as a "mind-numbed robot" by the left.

To that end, Dr. Sowell's use of the terms, "anointed" and "unenlightened," as well as his characterizations of the constrained and unconstrained visions are as locally accurate as and far more temporally durable than "conservative" or "liberal."

I prefer "self-annointed" or, even better, "precious".

Adopting stricter attitudes toward diet and health, more liberal modes of dress, and communing with nature does not a political stance make. It is the fact that those we call liberal behave in these ways as a collective imperative that makes the political statement. It is when one attempts to impose the behavior on others by governmental fiat that makes a political statement.

Joe Sobran referred to the left collectively as "The Hive".

One of the most insightful articles I have ever read.

I think the separation of the values of diet, health, dress, and communing with nature, ("crunchy") with a free-market, government-hands-off approach ("con") is what does it. The problem is when one gets so...well, *frustrated* with people (say chronic smokers who sue over lung cancer) that the temptation to intrude government becomes unbearable. Think of, who was it, Rousseau? His line "forced to be free" has a certain chilling logic.

About to start that vanity now, I promise.

Thanks for the wonderful, thought-provoking, and DEAD-ON comments. :-)

Cheers!

47 posted on 10/03/2006 9:39:39 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]

To: NCSteve
Dr. Sowell's use of the terms, "anointed" and "unenlightened," as well as his characterizations of the constrained and unconstrained visions are as locally accurate as and far more temporally durable than "conservative" or "liberal." The only trouble with them is that they require a lot of overhead. I guess that's the cost of avoiding the blurring that goes along with colloquial understanding.

Excellent summary of the last few days' points. Dr. Sowell is America's Greatest Living Intellectual, of course, and the rest of us (including Rod Dreher) are chopped liver in comparison :-).

48 posted on 10/04/2006 4:35:21 AM PDT by Tax-chick ("There's nowhere to go and you've got all day to get there ... on some beach, somewhere.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson