BUSHZOMBIE

Every Republican I meet fits nicely into one of three categories:

The Social Conservative:

Whenever I ask someone who is a self-described social conservative, here is the general answer I receive:

Bob: I’m a conservative.
Me: Oh yeah? How do you know?
Bob: I believe in family values and I’m a Christian.
Me: Hmmm… and could you define family values?
Bob: You know, staying married, one man to one woman, disciplining your kids, not being homosexual, that kind of thing.

Yes, Bob thinks that if only he believes hard enough in his philosophy of social conservatism, that all in America will be right (i.e. correct). What Bob has not considered is the reality:

Modern Republicans Have:

1. Exported our jobs.
2. Borrowed money to poorly execute a war.
3. Sold our debt to foreign interest.
4. Borrowed money to give tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans who in turn have invested in multinational corporations.
5. Sold that debt to foreign interest.
6. Given welfare to multinational corporations in exchange for political favors.
7. Sold that debt to foreign interest.
8. Allowed competitive advantages to multinational corporations who exploit foreign workers and worsen an already exasperated trade imbalance.
9. Therefore, raised relative taxes on the middle class and further decreased buying power for no additional benefit.
10. Borrowed MORE money (all the while jockeying to eliminate even MORE tax revenue for America’s wealthiest 17 families, called the “death tax”).
11. Sold THAT debt to foreign interest.
12. Debased the American economy and placed the middle class into a position of weak, servitude to the corporate machine and blamed the crisis on a global economy and a high tax rate.

Thus, it is difficult to discipline children when the mom and dad are working 24/7 while inflation eats away their existence.

Bob says, “Foul!!! You’re talking about economics. I’m talking about moral conduct.”

Let’s listen to a speech by Theodore Roosevelt:

We stand for a living wage. Wages are subnormal if they fail to provide a living for those who devote their time and energy to industrial occupations. The monetary equivalent of a living wage varies according to local conditions, but must include enough to secure the elements of a normal standard of living–a standard high enough to make morality possible, to provide for education and recreation, to care for immature members of the family, to maintain the family during periods of sickness, and to permit of reasonable saving for old age.

Unless a person has the economic freedom to live a moral life, a moral life is not possible. If all the rewards go to a few, then morality is not possible.

Bob Has a Vision Problem:

The problem with Bob is that he sees the world in terms of the conservative mindset. So he believes that people are generally up to no good. The real difference between cons and libs has to do with perceived human intent. The proof is in conservative strategy which always tries to control social behavior through regulation and quid pro quo:

1. Don’t offer food to the starving, else they will not work and revert to living off the public (unless accomplished via religion, thus forcing indoctrination).
2. Constitutional amendment to prevent gay marriage, else everyone will run off and marry their own gender.
3. Spy on our citizens, else they will plot against us.
4. War against drugs, else all will be plagued with drug use.
5. Laws against abortion, else women will not make a moral decision.

True social conservatives believe that in order to control a society you must control each person.

 

Many social conservatives have been brainwashed into calling themselves conservative because of the implications inherent in NOT going along with the control:

Q. Why are liberals against spying?
A. Conservative Answer: Because they have something to hide.
Implication: Liberals are hiding anti American behavior.

Q. Why don’t liberals want laws to control social behavior?
A. Conservative Answer: Because they want to participate in social practices with which I disagree.
Implication: Liberals are social deviants.

Q. Why are liberals so unwilling to care about what other people do?
A. Conservative Answer: Because they are participating in unacceptable behavior.
Implication: Liberals make poor behavior decisions and participate in unacceptable behavior.

Q. Why don’t liberals want to ban gay marriage?
A. Conservative Answer: Because they want to get married to members of the same sex.
Implication: Liberals are gay.

Q. Why don’t liberals want abortion laws?
A. Conservative Answer: Because they want abortions.
Implication: Liberals want to kill babies.

Ironically, conservatives believe (incorrectly) that liberals are morally corrupt based on the implication of choice. How odd. Poor Bob doesn’t understand that most liberals want to stay married, they are heterosexual and they discipline their kids in between jobs. Liberals simply don’t care if someone else has a different set of values as long as it doesn’t affect them.

The Evangelicals:

A sub-group of Social Conservatives are evangelicals. While they consist of a huge voter block, they wield little political power. They consistently vote for the Republican candidates (usually Neo-conservatives) who mimic evangelical morality. They are loyal servants of the RNC, but they seldom get their way. The current Republicans will never allow the evangelicals to control real political power, although they will use evangelicals as prescribed by Leo Strauss.

True Christians do not fit into the conservative political agenda (read Sermon on the Mount). To act as Jesus would be a complete disaster for the Conservative agenda.

Next, the Neo-Conservative…

---

The Neo-Conservative:

This is the current group who runs our nation. Neo-conservatives are a strange lot. They pretend to be social conservatives, but in fact you will find they almost always lead tainted lives, full of divorce, criminal behavior and hypocrisy.

You can pick almost any neo-conservative at random and find that what they say is exactly the opposite of how they live their lives. Rush Limbaugh (the chief water carrier for the Neo-conservatives): Talks about tossing druggies into jail for life, but is himself a drug user; talks about marriage, but has been divorced; talks about not giving handouts to the poor, but took government handouts himself. Newt Gingrich talks about family values and impeaching Clinton while at the same time he was committing adultery. Larry Craig (Quazi Neo-con) talks about naughty Clinton, but he himself participates in public, gay sexcapades. Rudy Giuliani talks about the importance of America’s security, but placed the control center for NYC in the WTC against his advisor’s recommendations for his own convenience (Rudy doesn’t talk much about his moral character — I give him credit for that since he’s a scumbag). Ronald Regan (the first son of Neo-Conservatism), talked endlessly about protecting America, but traded missiles to America’s enemies to score political points, broke the law and traded weapons and drugs while launching the War on Drugs. And then you have George W. Bush (Neo-Con court jester, RNC puppet and grand hypocrite): Sends people to war, goes AWOL. Talks about Iranian threat, but outs CIA agents. Talks about Jesus, but enriches himself and cronies, and on and on and on… Neo-Conservative hypocrisy is endles.

Neo-Conservatives are actually fascists. That is, they believe in the precepts of a fascist state: An authoritarian political environment where corporations and government become intertwined. To be fair, I believe the Neo-Conservative perspective is a little more nuanced than the traditional fascist point of view. Their beliefs are as follows:

1. Private Industry should be allowed to police itself – laissez faire capitalism.
2. All government functions should be privatized.
3. They follow the precepts of Leo Strauss – decisions of government are too vital to be left to the masses. But the masses must have the illusion of control. Best accomplished through religion
4. Imperialism – Neo-Conservatives utilize the One Percent Doctrine to justify imperialism. Read Project for a New American Century. But in reality, this is just a way to steal.

The Neo-Conservative doctrine is simple to define and can be characterized in a single word: GREED! In spite of all the elaborate dialog, Neo-Conservatives utilize Straussian Philosophy to enrichment themselves, regardless of the impact to society; the same behavior seen in sociopaths. There is nothing complicated about this group. They are morally bankrupt – ethically void.

---

The Libertarians:

A central argument of traditional conservatism vs. traditional liberalism is the notion of individualism vs. socialism. For Libertarians, the government’s role in America should be limited to maintaining currency and protecting the borders. Ironically, the Bush Administration has done such a disastrous job of running our country that many “one time liberals” are jumping on the Libertarian train because they would rather have no government (anarchy) than the current government.

Conservatives who follow this philosophy believe in the invisible hand, i.e. that if everyone acts in their own self interest, the greater good will be served.

They are perfectly correct in their notion. This is the basis our human existence, also known as “evolution”. It is absolutely true that if you abandon central authority and leave nature to its own devices, she will provide guidance that will nurture the existence of her creatures. You might have seen this at work if you’ve every watched Wild Kingdom. There is a reason that antelopes are fast. All the slow antelopes became lion chow, preventing little antelopes from growing up to be big, slow antelopes.

In essence, Libertarians believe that everyone should pay their own way and that your behavior is a matter of your personal decisions, thus as long as you don’t interfere with other people’s decisions, then you can do what you want. True Libertarians believe in social liberalism as well, i.e. the right of the individual to make their own personal decisions. No true Libertarian would be in favor of abortion law or in favor of banning gay marriage, thus people like Ron Paul are not Libertarian in fact, but simply lean Libertarian.

All of this may sound kind of nice.

As a member of the slow antelope club, you can take solace in your final thoughts under the lion’s claw; that you did your part in strengthening society by dying (crappy decisions will lead to your own demise). Libertarians believe in the law of the jungle. Be smart or be dead. This seems to work well for them until they themselves fall on hard times. Then, like Rush, they revert to the less noble Neo-conservative behavior.

The Libertarian point of view is an interesting choice. It is control through nature instead of control through social rules. It is individualism vs. socialism.

---

In Summary:

This is the sum total of conservatism. I would like to continue; to elaborate on the finer points, but there really are no finer points.

To be a conservative and be ignorant is to be the conservative base.

To be conservative and be enlightened is to be neurotic, sociopathic or evil.

There are permutations of the above. For example, you might have a Socially conservative - Libertarian, or a Neo-conservative - Evangelical. For the most part, conservatives stick to their own persuasion. Unfortunately, conservatism followed to its ultimate conclusion always results in total annihilation – such as what is happening in Iraq. There is not a single successful long term conservative example, because conservatism always fails. Ultimately, liberalism, the idea that people generally want to do good, prevails — or the society is vanquished.

Modern conservatism is a ponzi scheme, it unbalances the social equation in ways that eventually results in an epic disaster. Unlike liberalism that focuses on the weakest link, conservatism narrowly focuses on the strongest link with predictable results. Thus, you will see the death and rebirth of conservatism throughout human history. It’s too bad really. I bet Gutenberg thought he could solve this problem when he invented the printing press, but alas, he never met Rupert Murdoch.