Musings on the far right

  • tazzari

    Posts: 2929

    Sep 15, 2011 5:47 PM GMT
    I am reading an interesting little book on the War Cabinet decisions of late May, 1940 (culminating in the decision to fight on "at any cost") and am stuck again by the intransigent nature of conservatives who fall past a certain point to the right. The virulence toward both Churchill and Roosevelt from certain quarters, almost amounting to treason, is so like much of the present polarization in the US, where difference becomes hatred. For complex reasons, it seems to me that hard-line conservatism is more of a cult than a persuasion: things become black and white, and an "if you are not with me you are against me" attitude has only a very small step to take to "if you are not with me you are evil", which is where we increasingly find ourselves. The final step from this, which we are now taking, is "if you are not with me, you are evil, and that justifies any ends on my part to smash you." I have no idea how we get past this. History seems to indicate that it will take some sort of disaster or crisis to lance the boil. I am increasingly pessimistic.

    But I wonder why this is? Is the conservative tendency to trust/rely more on authority than is the case with more liberal thinkers? Does this lead to dependence on authority and a consequent rejection of "heresy"?

    Please note that the argument is NOT with conservatives; just with what one might call the pledge-signing type...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 15, 2011 6:07 PM GMT
    The funny thing is that I would have said the same thing about the left. The lack of critical thought amongst many on the extreme left bundling such things as the hate on for Bush, the conspiracy theories around 9/11, etc.

    And that quote by Bush for instance is often taken out of context. This is what he said: "We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. (Applause.) From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime."

    Did he state it in overly dramatic terms? unquestionably but you also have to read the whole thing and the context of the address September 20, 2001.

    The irony is that it isn't the right that has the faith in government and a greater deference to authority, that's the left. What kind of fascist movement argues that government interventions are too great and that power should be devolved?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 15, 2011 6:38 PM GMT
    That's because you lack a basic understanding of political theory, thought and science.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 15, 2011 6:52 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidThat's because you lack a basic understanding of political theory, thought and science.


    And yet, ironically, it is more evolved than your own icon_rolleyes.gif.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 15, 2011 7:29 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidThat's because you lack a basic understanding of political theory, thought and science.


    And yet, ironically, it is more evolved than your own icon_rolleyes.gif.


    You're welcomed to think that but anyone who conflate economic systems with political systems as if they were one-in-the-same has a lot of learning to do.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 15, 2011 9:16 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidThat's because you lack a basic understanding of political theory, thought and science.


    And yet, ironically, it is more evolved than your own icon_rolleyes.gif.


    You're welcomed to think that but anyone who conflate economic systems with political systems as if they were one-in-the-same has a lot of learning to do.


    I think you've gotten that confused with anyone who ignores the fact that they are often related. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 15, 2011 9:33 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidThat's because you lack a basic understanding of political theory, thought and science.


    And yet, ironically, it is more evolved than your own icon_rolleyes.gif.


    You're welcomed to think that but anyone who conflate economic systems with political systems as if they were one-in-the-same has a lot of learning to do.


    I think you've gotten that confused with anyone who ignores the fact that they are often related. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Related, sure. But you frequently use them interchangeably as well as conflate Nazism with the Left, etc...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 15, 2011 9:39 PM GMT
    tazzari saidI am reading an interesting little book on the War Cabinet decisions of late May, 1940 (culminating in the decision to fight on "at any cost") and am stuck again by the intransigent nature of conservatives who fall past a certain point to the right. The virulence toward both Churchill and Roosevelt from certain quarters, almost amounting to treason, is so like much of the present polarization in the US, where difference becomes hatred. For complex reasons, it seems to me that hard-line conservatism is more of a cult than a persuasion: things become black and white, and an "if you are not with me you are against me" attitude has only a very small step to take to "if you are not with me you are evil", which is where we increasingly find ourselves. The final step from this, which we are now taking, is "if you are not with me, you are evil, and that justifies any ends on my part to smash you." I have no idea how we get past this. History seems to indicate that it will take some sort of disaster or crisis to lance the boil. I am increasingly pessimistic.

    But I wonder why this is? Is the conservative tendency to trust/rely more on authority than is the case with more liberal thinkers? Does this lead to dependence on authority and a consequent rejection of "heresy"?

    Please note that the argument is NOT with conservatives; just with what one might call the pledge-signing type...


    The right feels the same way about the left.


    11300820religiousnut20RGB20110830101628.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 15, 2011 9:50 PM GMT
    It´s not a simple left/right thing.

    Since the 2008 election USA conservative politics has lurked off on a wild goose chase, becoming more and more extreme. It is something very different from the pre-bush era dialogue. IN the process they have dragged Obama further and further right with them as he seems incapable of articulating his own position, despite his oratorical gifts (or maybe he really is spineless).

    Anyway, it´s not a charge which can be laid at the feet of the USA democrats at the moment.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 15, 2011 11:36 PM GMT
    jprichva said But part of the liberal/progressive personality is that we do not like being dictated to.

    I read that line and immediately honed in on it.
    What dictator/autocracy in world history has ever been 'left' or liberal? I'd like an answer to this by one of our more 'conservative' or 'right' leaning members.