Posted on 01/16/2002 6:35:14 AM PST by Antoninus
I'll stick with the Rider On The White Horse.
You can have your "Guys Who Wear White Sheets".
Try saying what you really mean next.
Which is that the Libertarian and Republican Parties are doomed because they have fallen victim to "multiculturalism", which in your usage undoubtably means they admit people of color.
Unlike your pure, "non-multiculturalistic" party, whatever that may be.
I can hazard a few guesses, however.
As a member of the Religious Right refrenced above, there is no racism that I am aware of from our wing.
We oppose these things very strongly.
Look at the support for people Like Walter Williams, Clarence Thomas and Alan Keyes here on FR.
You don't find the RR trying to keep them out or talking them down. You DO however hear the "multiculturalists" on the Left jeering them constantly.
But that's certainly no reflection on us.
I'm not the rider.........note that it says "He Rides A White Horse", not "Me Rides A White Horse".
I merely took your advice, entered "culture of critique", and most hits referred to Jews and the usual tripe of civilization vs. them.
Sorry then, that isn't what you wanted me to read, right?
Interesting, isn't it? I've always suspected it was tied to some self-righteous feeling of superiority and elitism as in Sowell's "The Vision of the Anointed." Yet the behavior is so uniform it's hard to believe there's not something more to it. In the McCarthy years it was as if the anti-anti Communists were a bunch of Stalinist sleepers, acting like ordinary apolitical Americans until they got a "Telefon"-like signal from the Kremlin. In fact I strongly believe a lot of that was going on, but I think many were still in the thrall of Lincoln Steffens-style utopianism.
I was a reporter on the staff of a Salt Lake City newspaper at the time Skousen's "Naked Communist" was published. He was then SLC police chief. While I'd been brainwashed by a "liberal" college humanities education, I was beginning to feel the comforting gravitational tug of conservatism. I was amazed at the reaction to Skousen's book, even though the culture of the day was full of scorn towards John Birchers, McCarthyites and others the intellectual elite (including the TV talking heads of the day) considered to be low-life cretins. The liberals on the paper's staff (that is, nearly everyone) went bonkers. It was my first real experience with liberal-style hatred and intolerance. I wondered even then where all that anger and intensity came from.
I'd gone to Skousen's office one afternoon with the police reporter to learn the ropes of that particular beat. The reporter immediately got into a shouting contest with Skousen over the book and what then was considered anti-Communist "paranoia." I remember thinking that Skousen presented his ideas in a way I thought was calm, intelligent and reasoned and wondered why our guy was practically frothing at the mouth in contempt. Later, the paper's Executive Editor launched a series of Page One editorials -- unheard-of in that place and time -- denouncing Skousen as a charlatan and scoundrel. From that point on the paper was dedicated to getting Skousen fired, and it did. The attack was personal, vicious and completely disregarded the factual content of his book -- a technique that has become all too familiar over my lifetime. Liberals survive by suppressing thought and discussion. Political Correctness is a sophisticated refinement of that technique.
I recall thinking: "So much for the First Amendment. It all depends on who is speaking." At that point, my faith in the formerly shining beacon of journalism started to erode. What I've seen and experienced since has left a hole the size of the Grand Canyon.
Good questions. I've made several posts nearly identical to yours over the years. While I agree with you in nearly every particular, let me make a few comments.
Liberals control virtually the entire academic, media, bureaucratic and cultural apparatus. They saw years ago the immense power to be had by controlling the agenda for the entire culture. They also love to burrow into soft, high-paying jobs at taxpayer expense, where they can make rubber rules. I'll never forget my amazement when I made a transition from employment in the private sector to a university environment. My-oh-my, what a difference! There were all sorts of nice benefits but I quickly realized the taxpayers were getting screwed -- and still are.
If conservatives try to function in that culture it's pretty much a lost cause. They will be censored, trivialized and scorned. Conservatives are motivated by bottom-line profits. If they see a chance to generate them, as Rupert Murdoch did with Fox News, they'll risk the money necessary to set up an entirely new conservative-friendly structure. (And it may be that Murdoch will be an inspiration to other "angels" to finance similar enterprises -- I sincerely hope so). But can you imagine trying to get a conservative script acccepted by Disney or any of the other reigning Hollywood studios?
On the positive side, conservative books are having a good run on the best-seller lists right now, and a climate is slowly being created where it isn't instant social death to utter a conservative thought in public. But we have a long way to go and I join you in urging young people to seek careers in the arts, education and government where they, too, can influence the national agenda -- and prospects for their own futures.
Actually, I'll suggest reading glasses for you. Go look at post 81, and look carefully in the reply box.
I'll ask you a second time. What party would you have us join, the party that in your mind is the solution?
You have something in mind.........why not share it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.