Posted on 11/22/2021 6:19:21 AM PST by Kaslin
To be clear, though, from the outset, this article is not about me. It is about the question of what it means to be a conservative. I simply use myself as an example.
My question for consideration is this. If you have voted exclusively Republican for decades (including voting for Trump in 2016 and 2020), you are a staunch, Bible-based moral conservative on marriage and family issues, and you have consistently spoken out against the leftwing, Democratic agenda, how do you then become a “closet liberal”?
According to one commenter (with reference to me): “This writer is a closet liberal. He makes several stupid and false statements about Rittenhouse’s behavior. Kyle would be dead if he hadn’t been armed.
“And his absurd claim that a [sic] blacks receive harsher sentences is completely unfounded. Blacks have been committing violent hate crimes all over the country and, typically, they’re not even charged much less given harsher sentences. This writer is repeating fake liberal claims.”
So, you are a “closet liberal” if you write, “I don’t believe Rittenhouse should have been in Kenosha with a gun.” Seriously?
If you question the wisdom of a 17-year-old teen showing up in a very volatile environment with a gun, you are now a “closet liberal,” even though you agreed with the jury’s “not guilty” verdict? Is this the new definition of conservatism?
As for the allegedly “absurd claim that . . . blacks receive harsher sentences,” it appears the commenter failed to click on the link I supplied to a full-length article providing a meta-analysis of many years of study.
On second thought, though, because the article was published in the Washington Post, that would mean that, by its very nature, it is false. And that would confirm that, by daring to cite the Post, I must be a “closet liberal.”
Frankly, I find this kind of “reasoning” quite chilling, as if one must agree with every single rightwing talking point to be a true conservative. Or as if you cannot present another side of the story to be considered.
Unfortunately, I see this time and time again, which is why I draw attention to such comments: they are representative of a wider trend. And note also the racially biased nature of the comment concerning black criminals. Is that another mark of true conservatism? I certainly hope not.
But these days, even if you write countless articles debunking the “white supremacy” and “white privilege” narratives, the moment you say, “But there are racial disparities that remain in America, and we should do our best to address those,” you are now a RINO, a communist, a woke closet liberal, and worse. That kind of narrow-minded thinking should disturb those of us who identify as conservatives.
Really now, isn’t that what we always accuse the left of doing, namely, repeating the same mantras and talking points without nuance or balance? Is our side so weak that it can’t survive scrutiny or pushback or different points of view on secondary issues?
In response to my article calling for accountability for those who predicted or guaranteed that Trump would be reinstated to the White House in 2021, another commenter wrote, “What is interesting is how these RINO's like to avoid actually defending truth about the facts. So safe sitting on the fence and waiting to see which side is safe once the fence falls. Michael Brown is a coward of epic proportions. Rather than point out the fraud with the reams of evidence that abound, he chooses to hamstring those that hoped honesty and truth would prevail. How brave Mr. Brown is for his middle ground in avoidance of reality.”
This time, it appears that unless you say, “I KNOW THE ELECTION WAS STOLEN,” then you are not to be trusted. And obviously, you are not a true conservative. (For the record, I did not comment on whether the election was stolen in the article, other than to say I was hoping the courts would prove that it was stolen.)
And if you voted for Trump (twice) and yet say, “Don’t listen to the prophecies claiming he will be reinstated to the White House in 2021,” then you are a double-minded fence-sitter.
Of course, I’ve been on public record since January 6 that Trump would not be supernaturally (or even legally) reinstated to the White House during the Biden term, outside of the possibility of reelection in 2024. So, I’ve hardly been fence-sitting.
But nowadays, unless you encourage every hope and dream that somehow, fraud will still be discovered and Trump will be restored (before the 2024 elections), you are avoiding reality, taking a cowardly middle ground position, and are a RINO.
Ironically, in this very same article, I had written, “In this regard, a typical tactic would be to attack the messenger, in this case, accusing me of being weak. Or a RINO (I'm actually a registered Independent who votes Republican, based on conservative principles rather than party affiliation). Or approving of abortion (as if recognizing Biden as president makes me guilty of shedding innocent blood). Or lacking in faith. Or being unspiritual. Or whatever.”
So, I was fully expecting these kinds of comments and attacks. And they came in bunches, as predicted. As I had also written in the very next lines, “But that's the least of my concerns. In fact, it is not my concern at all, since I'm not writing this to gain popularity or support.”
To the contrary, as I also wrote recently, I fully expect pushback like this and welcome it warmly. Bring it on! (My only request is that you read the article, and where it is helpful, check the links provided, before commenting.)
My concerns are with a particular definition of “conservatism” that adds certain qualifications to one’s orthodoxy. And I am concerned with the mindset that does not even consider the possibility that any opposing points of view could have any validity at all.
How is this “conservatism”? And how is this any better than the “woke” culture of the left?
When we cancel each other out because we do not demonstrate a sufficiently narrowminded, unquestioning loyalty to all rightwing talking points, we are in trouble.
No, but visa versa.
In fact if you have strong integrity you will especially call out the ones that come from your side.
***That’s why I got banned from FR.
“No war for oil” sounds pretty eloquent now. What did Iraq get us. Viet Nam?
This guy has hit on a point...
What is a conservative?
What defines a conservative?
I have asked this very question a number of times on this site, and have gotten zero answers.
So, please tell me one thing that a conservative believes.
I will compile the list by numbers of responses per item, and publish here on this thread.
Wrap your lips around this - FOAD.
What an self-satisfied, bottom-boy you are. Are you straight from GOPe casting?
Yes, well said. The whole episode opened up because the police drew back. That is their JOB. Similar rioting happened in 1992 after the Rodney King verdict — police drew back and the rioting started.
Whiner. There are plenty of areas I disagree with most conservatives on. I am still “conservative”, at least most liberals hate me, lol.
I’m a proud liberal. However in saying that, hear me out. I’m pro 2A, own firearms and proudly served my country. I’m fiscally conservative, and despise what this administration is doing to ruin this country. I believe all lives matter, especially blue lives. I believe in a strong military and love God and Country. Our borders must be secured and we must defend against enemies, both foreign and domestic. Go to school, get a job, find the right person to marry, raise a family and enjoy everything freedom has to offer. Be accountable for your own actions.
It’s social issues where I admit I go off the rails. I don’t give a crap about what gender you want to be. You are born either XX or XY, so if you want to identify as a golden retriever named Pickles or be known as a wheel of cheese, have at it. If you want to have sex with whoever or for that matter whatever, have fun. I don’t care. Abortion? Sure, it’s a woman’s choice and in the end the only person she will answer to is God. There should be social programs to help those less fortunate and government shouldn’t choose winners and losers based on political bias.
I believe in a fairness doctrine for the media. When it comes to government, they have one job and that is to be the citizenries oversight vehicle used to keep our politicians honest. If they cannot do that, then they need to be tagged as bias and splash that on the screens of their broadcasts.
In the end, we all answer to God.
I think Mr. Brown analysis is not reasoned; it is self-serving screed designed to make his opinions justifiable, and to make those who disagree with him look unreasonable.
Too many public figures have started out conservative and drifted left. Now any signal that a man is becoming moderate is noticed.
The solution: don’t drift left.
Strangely, on the other hand, if a Bernie-supporting, pro-abortion, anti-gun socialist democrat says one thing remotely against her own party (looking at you, Tulsi Gabbard) “conservatives” will get down right sexually aroused and proclaim she should be Trump’s running mate in the next election!
No, you can question all of them and still be a conservative in good standing. Over at National Review.
Unfortunately, this is true of too many GOP politicians and pundits.
“If you have voted exclusively Republican for decades”
If you have enthusiastically voted for every RINO on offer, you are indeed a liberal.
There is such a thing as a horrible argument made in support of a good cause. Conservatives should call out crappy arguments, and not just parrot any argument made in support of our causes no matter how stupid it may be. Too often, if you're a conservative who calls out a crappy argument made by another conservative, you're tagged with the "closet liberal" label.
Conservatives are not a clear majority in this country, and if we're going to win, we're going to have to persuade those people in the middle who are persuadable that we are right. And we're not going to do that by pushing stupid arguments that are easily torn apart by anyone on the left with a brain.
What defines a conservative?
We are talking american conservatism, most pundits go sideways and end up pulling something out of english conservatism.
Point 1 - Anti Communism.
Conservatives uphold voluntary community, quite as they oppose involuntary collectivism.
As long as you never question the factual veracity of anything the Gateway Pundit news merchandiser asserts then you might be fine.
“And we’re not going to do that by pushing stupid arguments that are easily torn apart by anyone on the left with a brain.”
This approach appears to be working for the left. Of course, a few extra ballots doesn’t hurt...
You’re right, should’ve wrote “reasoned analysis”, it really isn’t, it is self-serving delusions.
I’m in no way a closet liberal and simply rely on common sense. However, this thread reminds me of how some of us have to live during current times.
My recent method of dealing with liberal and perpetually offended people is to play the double agent role. If mindless leftists insist on talking politics at work I steer clear. I often get the feeling that they are just looking to Target people who don’t agree with their radical views.
I like to listen closely to understand who I’m dealing with and reply with what they want to hear. Usually it’s bland like “I understand that” or “Right On!”. When they ask what I think I tell them that “I am too busy to pay attention to politics at this point in my life”.
For some parents and bread winners there is no way to survive in certain situations without becoming a chameleon of sorts. Going along to get along all the while playing the long game ala Winston Smith of 1984 or even The Count of Monte Cristo.
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.