Welcome friends!
I was just marveling yet again at the mighty chasm that has opened up in what seems like a very short time indeed between mainstream conservatives and liberals here in the USA. It’s a commonplace by now or perhaps even already a cliché to say these two halves of the population live in different worlds but that’s really the only way to describe the phenomenon. Of course, I’m sure we’ve all known or heard of people who inhabit different worlds due typically to mental illness, personality disorders, substance abuse, social isolation, and sometimes even idiosyncratic genius. Such people appear more or less randomly on the right and left of the political and economic spectrum. However, this new phenomenon is different. We’re talking about huge tracts of the country and millions of people one had only a short time before presumed were for the most part reliably inhabiting one’s own world suddenly vanishing and then reappearing as strange unrecognizable denizens of a foreign and distant land. It’s really like nothing in my experience. Certainly we had plenty of social divisions and political and economic disagreements during other eras for example the 1960s but this one feels somehow different. Those earlier social upheavals were gradual, expected, anticipated, even dare I say more or less understood. The one we’re witnessing now is something I wouldn’t have believed would or could ever happen despite my sincere efforts to follow the twists and turns of conservative ideology over these past several decades. I’m certainly in no position to try to explain the darkness that has fallen upon us; however, I thought this time out I might at least comment on the characteristics of the chasm itself to just remind future researchers of the mighty dimensions of the issue they may one day think to explain.
One issue that has become increasingly clear is conservatives and liberals hold very, very different values. Well, OK, I guess we already knew that so I suppose I should say instead the differences between the values of conservatives and liberals are more comprehensive than we previously realized. Indeed, cataloguing these manifold differences is clearly beyond the scope of a short blog post but maybe I can at least mention a few highlights.
Liberals support political democracy based on the egalitarian notion of one person one vote. Conservatives have become very suspicious and critical of this arrangement and appear fascinated with the myriad ways in which democracy may lead to less than ideal results on particular issues at particular moments in time. They’ve become obsessed with the idea of shrinking the role of democratic government or in the striking imagery of some of their leaders “drowning it in the bathtub” by choking off necessary tax revenue. Lately when conservatives talk about our democratic government they present it as just one more iteration of some generalized notion of “government” broadly conceived and thus comparable in their eyes to any other iteration such as fascism or totalitarian communism.
Liberals support political democracy based on the egalitarian notion of one person one vote. Conservatives have become very suspicious and critical of this arrangement and appear fascinated with the myriad ways in which democracy may lead to less than ideal results on particular issues at particular moments in time. They’ve become obsessed with the idea of shrinking the role of democratic government or in the striking imagery of some of their leaders “drowning it in the bathtub” by choking off necessary tax revenue. Lately when conservatives talk about our democratic government they present it as just one more iteration of some generalized notion of “government” broadly conceived and thus comparable in their eyes to any other iteration such as fascism or totalitarian communism.
Liberals are very concerned about the corrosive influence on our egalitarian democratic system of government of eminently non-egalitarian big money. Conservatives leery and disapproving of the egalitarian basis of political democracy see no such problem. They applaud the ability of wealth to dominate our political system and wish to enhance it as much as possible
Viewing political systems as valuable mostly in terms of social control to enforce the wishes of a relatively small cadre of economically powerful people conservatives here in the USA like conservatives around the world encourage the idea of combining religion and government thus rejecting one of our traditional core principles: freedom of conscience and the separation of church (or more broadly religion) and state. Liberals support our traditional values when it comes to the ability of citizens to choose to follow the religion of their choice or indeed no religion at all if they feel so inclined.
Because American conservatives view government primarily in terms of social control and the legitimization of economic power similarly to other conservatives around the world rather than as a system of public deliberation and debate meant to be distinct from the structures of economic power generated by our interpretation of the market system and our laws governing the distribution and dissemination of wealth they despise the free press because of its ability to criticize and document the failures and shortcomings of their administration. Liberals supporting the democratic process and taking it seriously consider a free press very important to our way of life and consider critical commentary and debate a sign the press is taking its social obligations seriously.
Similar considerations apply to education including particular subjects such as critical thinking. Liberals taking the democratic process seriously consider an educated and informed populace essential to a healthy democracy. Conservatives are suspicious of education and wax eloquent whenever possible about their ostensible love of the ignorant and uneducated. They argue vociferously against classes in subject areas like critical thinking, philosophy, logic, history, and the humanities in general.
Liberals taking the democratic exercise seriously believe our society can accommodate and benefit from diversity along dimensions intrinsic to people’s constitution and logically and philosophically irrelevant to their duties as citizens, such as gender, sexual orientation, race, cultural background, and so forth. Conservatives believe passionately that such diversity weakens the structures of social control that operate through contrived or enforced uniformity of opinion and belief and hence tend to believe any diversity inevitably weakens the nation. They yearn for a society run by and for wealthy “white” heterosexual males with Christian religious views.
Economically liberals see any number of potential ethical issues with how economic power is allocated by market systems, which of course goes some way toward explaining the significance they attach to political power generated by egalitarian democracy. Conservatives see no such issues. They’re all in when it comes to the basis and implications of our current distribution of economic power. Indeed a good part of their rationale for opposing democratic government is precisely the fear egalitarian political power might be used to counteract, thwart, or even redistribute the much more ethically reliable economic power. Under the conservative view if people are homeless, or jobless, or hungry, or even I suppose dying on the street corner, that’s all good and exactly as it should be because that’s what the market decreed and the market is an infallible arbiter of such things. The conservative mantra is that greed is good; not honesty, not knowledge, not civility, not humane values. Greed is their one and true objective and wealth the only characteristic they respect.
These value differences reach even to the level of personal behavior. Liberals believe the sort of low behaviors demonstrated by President Trump, lying, cheating on one’s wife, paying one’s mistress hush money and later sending people to threaten her, spreading baseless rumors and innuendo, insulting people, trying to enflame low prejudices for personal gain, skipping out on one’s bills, avoiding paying taxes, and so on should preclude him from holding positions of public responsibility. Conservatives see no problem with that sort of thing and indeed feel it makes Mr. Trump very smart and uniquely suited to be president of the USA.
When it comes to values conservatives and liberal are poles apart. At one time in the not so distant past conservatives were cast as uniquely interested in values and referred to as “values voters” but it should now be clear to even the most obtuse of observers both conservatives and liberals take their values seriously but those values are very, very different indeed.
Moving away from the issue of the astonishing differences in values where only a few years ago most people might have suspected to find many points of similarity we arrive at some very stark differences in epistemological beliefs, that is, beliefs relating to how we should evaluate statements as true or false. When it comes to statements about the physical world liberals tend to support the scientific method. Conservatives famously believe the scientific method is simply one method of defining what is true among any variety of equally legitimate others including notably religious dogma. According to their assessment one should be free to declare as true whatever one finds most appealing or consistent with one’s chosen worldview. Science may say something about the age of the Earth or whatever and the Bible may say something else. Both are true. Take your pick.
When it comes to evaluating claims made in the news media liberals tend to support the prevailing method of checks and balances and the records of reliability that govern serious news media. They recognize of course that thenews reports both facts as well as opinions and values and endeavor to keep an eye on both by getting their information from a variety of historically reliable sources and referring to expert and academic assessments of claims and counterclaims. Conservatives have become famous for their penchant for characterizing inconvenient news as “fake” apparently muddling the positive and the normative. They feel news reported by mainstream media is biased and unreliable preferring to characterize as “true” unsubstantiated, unverified, and impossible to replicate claims from any number of offbeat and generally unevaluated information sources based apparently solely on how they feel about the ostensible facts being presented. This difference in particular has created enormous communication difficulties as even the basic facts of any number of issues have been transformed into what is now cast as a matter of personal opinion and the mutually agreed starting points for discussions of important social issues have gradually vanished to near zero.
Then there is yet a third area which I think liberals and conservatives face very stark differences. I’m referring now to their use of language. Liberals consistent with their respect for democracy, freedom of speech, science, education, and the power of human reason tend to use language as an honest attempt to express and discuss ideas and values. It has gradually become clear that conservatives think of language very differently and in rather more practical terms as primarily a tool one can use to manipulate others into doing one’s bidding. This was very clearly demonstrated during Mr. Trump’s campaign for the presidency in which liberals found themselves constantly pointing out the falsehoods and inconsistencies in Mr. Trump’s utterances only to find indignant conservatives explaining they knew the man was not speaking honestly and they understood he was not to be taken literally. In their assessment liberals were missing the whole point. Mr. Trump was using language not to express what he really thought about issues but to establish emotional bonds with his listeners. His emphasis was on expressing humor, anger, and resentment in an entertaining way (or what passes for an entertaining way for our less educated and intelligent comrades) to ingratiate himself with his political base. Factual accuracy and even honesty had nothing to do with it.
This manner of communicating that was never meant to be taken either literally or seriously has famously continued on into Mr. Trump’s presidency with the man spewing out seemingly randomly all manner of outlandish and inconsistent claims with a smirking disregard for the norms of normal mature conversation. It’s largely this feature of contemporary conservatism that has made many liberals who may have previously attempted to engage conservatives seriously and honestly determine we are now too far apart intellectually for such an effort to be useful. Liberals talk to one another honestly and reasonably and try to preserve the integrity and point of democracy. Conservatives lie and pose and try to manipulate other conservatives into doing whatever provides them with economic power, preserves their economic power, and weakens political democracy.
I would suggest a good part of this may be a natural outgrowth of the differences in education, training, and experience of liberals and conservatives. Liberals of course tend to be better educated and understand and respect the power of human reason and sensible discourse. They often work in academia and the sciences. Conservatives tend to have more practical backgrounds with an emphasis on such business related fields as marketing, advertising, and other forms of consumer deception and manipulation.
Thus on top of the gigantic differences in values and the striking differences in epistemological beliefs we have the awkward reality that conservatives and liberals are not even using language the same way and in particular conservatives are not using language to engage with liberals in good faith to discuss and explain their beliefs and values. Not surprisingly the level of public discourse in this country has fallen to new lows of stupidity, rudeness, and pointlessness.
Will American democracy be able to withstand the dire intellectual and moral threat posed by contemporary conservatism as expressed by the Republican Party and its legion of supporters? Wait. Didn’t I just ask that same question last time? Well, it’s an important question so I suppose it’s fine to pose it again. Will American democracy be able to withstand the dire intellectual and moral threat posed by contemporary conservatism as expressed by the Republican Party and its legion of supporters? I don’t know. We’ve seen many other cultures and systems around the world and throughout history devolve into mindlessness, greed, violence, and dysfunction, and there is no reason to suppose the USA is immune to the forces that have dragged these other nations inexorably to their dooms. But fretting about the future is such a tiresome and unproductive exercise isn’t it? All we really have to do now is resolve to argue against the intellectual and moral rot of conservative ideology to the best of our abilities. The future of the nation may well depend upon it. Long live the liberal ethos! Long live democracy!
