Comments on: That’s Rich.

By: Matt Davies

Matt Davies — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 16:21:11 +0000

Bill, that’s not a blithe statement on my part. I really do find that in practice those two are at odds with each other. I don’t dismiss conservatism as a political theory (and I will take a look at Mr Kirk’s book.) In fact I respect those who wish to keep Government’s role in our lives to an acceptable minimum. I’m one of them. What I do have trouble with is the strange neocon hybrid that “Disasterman” outlined perfectly above.
Also the sneering, overbearing style of governance foisted upon us all in the past almost eight years has probably put the cause of true “conservatism” back way more than any reactionary editorial cartoonist could.

By: Bill

Bill — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 04:51:08 +0000

Matt,

This really isn’t the forum to get into this at length, but I didn’t blithely posit two of the core tenets of conservative political philosophy. Nor should you blithely suggest that a regard for the primacy of individual liberty and a secondary regard for social and institutional traditions are inconsistent, particularly with no supporting argument. I thought I stated rather clearly that adhering to these two principles is what separates conservatism from libertarianism.

Now, I have read Marx and Lenin, and innumerable leftist theorists (I also read the Journal News). Before you dismiss conservatism as a serious political philosopy, you should, at the least, read Russell Kirk’s excellent compendium of conservative thought over the past several centuries.

By: DisasterMan

DisasterMan — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 03:24:54 +0000

Hmm… precise definitions again – as I understand it the American principle of liberty was originally largely concerned with the liberty of the individual from the interference of government – hence the War of Independance (You guys remember that doncha? We won. We left you over there. It was all just a cunning ploy!) in response to the tyranny of oppressive taxes for George IV to fund european wars half a globe away.

And yet, many of those self proclaimed guardians of modern liberty are massively concerned with the intimate details of your reproductive and pharmacological habits amongst many other things.

Still, on the other hand, they do make an enormous effort to free millions of Americans from the most onerous burdens of government, in the form of relieving them of the unbearable task of casting a vote once every four years.

Indeed, “No taxation without representation!”
I can still hear it echoing today…

By: Matt Davies

Matt Davies — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 21:20:20 +0000

“conservatism, above all, values individual liberty. But, it also values social and institutional traditions”

Sorry Bill…From a purely ideological standpoint, I believe that those two are mutually exclusive.

By: DisasterMan

DisasterMan — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:47:56 +0000

Seriously? You think *C*onservative politicians ACTUALLY enact policies inline with the values of *c*onservative individuals?

The briefest encapsulation of this that I can come up with off the cuff is thus:

The *c*onservative values of personal freedom translate into *C*onservative policies of corporate anarchy where the rights of individuals are trumped by those of business. Actual social policies are tailored solely to pander to voters for the preservation of power.

I think we can see this principle in action without having to cast our nets too wide…

And of course, similar comparisons can be made with Liberal politics too.

It’s politics, baby.
Polical cartoons are satire.

By: Bill

Bill — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:08:55 +0000

Matt,

I would be more than willing to show you the error of your ways regarding the social/political views of the Right. In summary, conservatism, above all, values individual liberty. But, it also values social and institutional traditions, which is a primary distinction between conservatism and libertarianism. Conservatives also recognizes that there is a “Creator” (without presuming to define the deity)from whom rights and obligations flow. A good and comprehensive starting point for developing your understanding of the conservative philopsophy in its full historical context(although it is not an easy read) is The Conservative Mind by Russell Kirk.

By: BULLDOG

BULLDOG — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 19:10:47 +0000

You lost Disasterman? Now were all in trouble.

By: DisasterMan

DisasterMan — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:14:59 +0000

@Bulldog:

Humour? Sorry, you’ve lost me…

};p

By: Matt Davies

Matt Davies — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 17:53:04 +0000

Bill, You’re welcome. I fully understand that I display opinions offensive to some, though they are mostly reactions to other people’s opinions that I find offensive (particularly the Right’s social political views.) But it’s rarely my aim to deliberately offend, so much as frame my thoughts in as creative and interesting a way as I can muster. And I never take myself seriously. What’s funny about what I do for a living, is that in person, I’m not abrasively political at all. I kind of keep my opinions to myself outside the workplace. Pretty much the polar opposite of everyone else, huh?

By: Bill

Bill — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 17:31:36 +0000

Lord Baltimore…...I’m the one with the glasses, and rather than being “defensive,” I have oft been told that I am rather offensive.

Matt…..thank you for your good-humored “agreement” with my assessment. Now I wish my posting were less ad hominem and more about the substance of the cartoon. Cheers.