|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Paji eh Wong
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 12:58 am Post subject: The Howling Wilderness of Pseudoconservatism |
 |
|
Here's an interesting article written by a conservative (I believe). HE gets sidetracked, and the fascist comparisons don't work, as always, but it's an interesting read.
http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/comments/c507.htm
| Quote: |
When Professor Hofstadter diagnosed pseudo-conservatism from the dominant tradition of cold war liberalism, he was describing a fringe element, which is why he appended the "pseudo" prefix: Birchers, Minutemen, and McCarthyite remnants of the ideological wars of the 1950s. The only "conservatism" he was apparently comfortable with was the Eisenhower/Rockefeller variant of the New Deal consensus.
Writing 40 years ago, Hofstadter did not seem to grasp that a new political consensus based on conservative ideas would become the ascendant political expression in the United States. Beginning with Goldwater's candidacy and culminating in Republican control of Congress in 1994, conservatism became as dominant in American politics as liberalism was in Hofstadter's day.
Sincere or not, President Clinton's statement that "the era of big government is over" was the definitive acknowledgment that conservative ideas had rhetorically triumphed. The statement would have been inconceivable coming from Roosevelt or Johnson – or even Eisenhower or Nixon or Ford.
Like any other political movement, for conservatism to make headway, it needed serious intellectual manifestos. As the liberal paradigm stagnated and ossified throughout the 1970s and 80s, hitherto little-known writers like George Gilder and Charles Murray changed the framework of political debate. Whatever one thinks of the political tenor of their books, these writers, and arguably others like Allan Bloom and Marvin Olasky, wrote serious works which attempted to grapple with public policy issues in a serious way. Their work built on a pre-existing intellectual foundation of conservative thinkers as varied as Hayek, Mises, Kirk, and Nisbet. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 2:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| That was interesting. Thanks for posting it. I will have to read it again and think about it when I have some free time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 9:44 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
Don't get me wrong. It was an interesting read.
| Quote: |
| Writing 40 years ago, Hofstadter did not seem to grasp that a new political consensus based on conservative ideas would become the ascendant political expression in the United States. Beginning with Goldwater's candidacy and culminating in Republican control of Congress in 1994, conservatism became as dominant in American politics as liberalism was in Hofstadter's day. |
What do I have to say to this?
HELLO, MAYBE TWO PARTIES ARE NOT ENOUGH.
Far be it from me to criticize people criticizing the right, but I can't buy into a whole broadside against conservatives when "liberals" chose some pseudo-war guy to represent them in the last election. Were it my choice, I would have had a Dean full-on anti-war ticket. I'm sure there are conservatives who vote conservative for fiscal and governmental reasons as opposed to religious reasons.
The point is that, for all these people care to analyze politics, the problem is that we need more than 2 parties. Period. It would reduce Ann Coulter-types influence and , to be fair, Michael Moore-types influence.
Moreover, it would be better representation.
And there would be less need for scholarly inquiry into how the two parties basically behave the same according to their dominant or underdog roles in American politics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paji eh Wong
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 11:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Far be it from me to criticize people criticizing the right, but I can't buy into a whole broadside against conservatives when "liberals" chose some pseudo-war guy to represent them in the last election. |
I agree. I'm sure there must be a "Howling Wilderness of Pseudoliberalism" out there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
