The Death of Conservatism

The heartless, spiritually bankrupt intellectual frauds who openly court -- and are disturbingly non-judgmental of -- the most intolerant loathsome elements of the political landscape (who for some unconscionable reason have been consulted about virtually everything our government has been doing or undoing for the past six plus agonizing years) -- these are the fruits of a particular strain of conservative idealogues with a shared affinity for the Hobbesian view of humanity, which postulates that people are essentially evil and the role of the ruling class, the government, was to have a standing army and police presence and little else. Essentially that the "people" were totally on their own, frontier-style with no public services, healthcare, college grants, headstart, maintenance of roads and bridges, public defenders, job training programs, Medicare, Medicaid; you get the picture.

Also violently opposed to the Jeffersonian assertion that people were basically good and part of a government's function is to engender the conditions where life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are possible through education, hard work and a sense of community, whereas conservatives have only contempt for the notion of a fair playing field.

Conservatism is in its last throes if you will, twisting in the wind, dying like communism did because neither philosophy works by definition -- they both operate from the fraudulent premise built around contempt for and control of the people.

In the coming months and years history will not absolve them. These multimillionaire radio and television personalities who stoke and taunt "Joe Sixpack" with cleverly and sometimes not-so hate speech, railing about the danger of gays taking over and turning everything and everyone gay; Hollywood liberals seem to be among the most evil people since Sodom and Gomorrah, African-Americans are attacked in veiled terms that are usually not as veiled as they think, playing on people's fear of losing their job, demonizing foreigners seemingly from everywhere, scoffing at the notion that there is no class system in this country. All the while looking down on rubes and suckers who vote against things that are in their self interest and very survival to help further a cynical, mean-spirited political movement that has become a dangerous parody of the most astoundingly inept, impotent bully wannabes who can count among them physical and intellectual cowards who knowingly and smugly perpetrate lies that have literally cost untold lives.
How did this legendarily generous and open nation become fearful, distrustful, anxious and worried about our families, our country, our future?

We must resist being manipulated into thinking that a so-called "war on terror" is "winnable"; this is as patently impossible as trying to empty a river with your hat. Terrorism is a tactic, not a country -- there always were terrorists and will always be. This is not a war that can be "won" in the conventional sense -- that is clearly an impossibility. Recent events have shown that good police work can do more than an ill-conceived war that has become a recruiting tool. The sooner it ends, the recruits diminish and the police, with the federal government's support, can do what they are trained to do.

The Department of Homeland Security was a totally unnecessary boondoggle that is redundant and sadly ludicrous because it is now known that prior to 9/11, all the information we needed to anticipate and probably prevent the attack was in existence but not shared by different agencies because of turf battles and rivalries for funding and boys with secrets out of control and not sharing because it's their secrets.

As we continue to watch conservatism devour itself we can all hope that in the end, Jefferson's dream of fair governance can be realized before it is too late.

To be continued

-- Richard Belzer

Comments

[mamacat]

I have been waiting for a blog that I could use to say this.

First of all, love ya Richard, but I disagree a little bit. I think there is nothing wrong with conservatism as a point from which to start one's political activism or inquiries. Many traditional conservative ideas are reasonable. Republicans and Democrats used to have no problems discussing things. I am reminded of the story of how close JFK and Goldwater were. What I have a problem with is the neo-con hijacking of the Republican Party.

Secondly, am I the only one, while watching the Republican debates, who is reminded of the story about the Emperor's clothes? It seems like all (but for one) of the Republican candidates are saying things like "Oh, the Emperor is so beautiful in his wonderful cloak of patriotism and honor! I intend to be just like the Emperor, only more so!"

And then, a lone voice speaks up. "The Emperor isn't wearing any clothes! He isn't dressed in the American flag that I know and love, he's completely naked!!"

Whatever else you want to say about Ron Paul, I think he is a traditional conservative, and more importantly, he is someone I can respect. Even if I don't agree with him on everything, I can respect him as a smart, honest, decent man, someone who is not blinded by the neo-con spin machines.

[doctoracula]

Oh, man, what a most excellent and righteous rant.

Conservatism as an ideology isn't outdated, but the way it's been used in the last decade, the concept (as well as the term) are becoming so outdated and loaded with negative meaning that only in the gated communities and corporate boardrooms is the concept going to be able to be discussed freely for the next generation.

In that way, Belzer's exactly right: it's exactly like Communism, which has also been stigmatized and demonized to the point where it's become little more than a punchline.

Great piece, Richard. I can't wait for the next part.

[Dantheman99]

And what conservatism has led to is a one-dollar, one-vote society, rather than a one-person, one vote society.

Conservatives are about capital, liberals should be about labor, not just another version of capital.

The ruling class of heredity conservatives used to support 300 years ago, they now support as a ruling class of plutocracy.

That a moron like Bush should become leader of the most powerful country on Earth is the epitome of the conservative value of privilige by hereditary and economic status over merit of the individual.

The Bush Presidency and merge of church and state, and the governance of the plutocracy, and the destruction of civil liberties is conservatism itself taken to the extreme -- no matter how much some conservatives try to disavow Bush. They made him, they support him, they now have to dance with him.

Of course some of them don't want him called a conservative. Bush proved that conservatism doesn't work, and thank goodness for that.

I just hope that whoever the Democrat Presidential candidate is, they will discuss the failure of conservatism, and use the word "conservative" in telling the truth about it, and offer the restoration of liberal values that made this country back and a dynamic policy agenda, whether they call it "progressive" or whatever. Call it "Bob" for all I care. It's still liberalism and it's still what our country needs, now more than ever.

Of course, if Hillary is the nominee, expect an ideology free campaign. Because she will be the first woman president, she will provide liberal symbolism without the liberal substance -- which is why Murdoch isn't threatened by her.

[ChristianEcon.com]

Dantheman99, I couldn't agree more. I'm noticing Republicans and "conservatives" are, *as we speak* slithering out of loudly championing and force-feeding us the Bush administration and 6 years of Republicans being in charge of all 3 branches of government; I noticed Fred Thompson has entered the race as if the country never has put conservative principles into action. O'Reilly, Limbaugh, etc. are all acting as if "the far left" and and the "liberals" are responsible for what's happened and not themselves, despite their people being in charge of everything. I really hope America doesn't continue to let them off the hook. It boggles my mind that conservatism, even neo-conservatism, still appears to be alive and well despite its results.

[Dantheman99]

Conservatism isn't going anywhere. Neither is liberalism.

What we call "neo-conservatism" has proven itself a total failure at home and abroad. Conservatives, should the be out of power, will go back and reinvent themselves.

Like or not, conservatism has a coherent philosophical underpinning. It is one I utterly disagree with and will never vote for, but conservatism itself will survive, however weakened.

I wish Liberals would use the world liberal proudly. We need liberalism in this country. A few focus groups and media consultants have been pushing the word progressive as an alternative and Bill Clinton is his current speeches talks about Conservatism vs. Progressivism. "Progressivism" hasn't caught on as an adjective because no one knows what it means.

The American people still use the world "liberal". Canada and Britain and much of Europe have very successful "Liberal" parties.

I guess as a gay man, where I've seen our community turn words like "queer" and the pink triangle into symbols of empowerment, I don't think running away from the word "liberal" is helpful or will work.

Liberals should rally around the word liberal and not force the word "progressive" as a replacement. Conservatives are going to call their opponents "liberals" no matter what they call themselves, so "liberals" might as well start using the word proudly.

At the moment, the decline of conservatism doesn't mean the decline of corporatism in power. I would much rather hear us talk about the rebirth of liberalism.

Despite the success of conservatives in demonizing the word "liberal", most American's don't realize they are liberals or they support many aspects of liberalism.

[Dantheman99]

Social, economic and environemntal justice are liberalisms hallmarks.

If you support Civil Rights over States Rights, you are a liberal.

If you support habeus corpus, the magna carta and equality before the law, you are a liberal.

If you support separation of church and state as a virtue for both and not a necessary evil, you are a liberal.

If you believe that everyone should have equality of opporunity and a fair shake in society, you are a liberal.

If you believe that everyone is created equal and have an inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, including the people you don't like and people who are of different race, religion, gender or sexual orientation than you, than you are liberal.

If you believe that there is such a think as societal welfare and those who are prosperous have an obligation to give back to the society that enabled them to become prosperous, then you are a liberal.

If one throughout our history supported the right of women and people of color to vote, if one supported mass education, access to health care, and any form of social justice, you have been on side of liberalism. Conservatives fought every one of these things at the time, from abolition to Medicaid, from Social Security to union organizing to conserving the environment.

Allowing conservatives to demonize the word "liberal" and liberals running away from the word and making a futile attempt at replacing it with the word "progressive" which has failed, has not been good for the American left.

Instead, liberals need to start reclaiming the good name of liberal and the good adjective of liberal. A choice between conservatism and non-conservatism isn't a choice for a positive alternative.

Now I do consider myself a "progressive", but a "liberal" as well. I don't run away from either word.

[PoliceState]

I agree.

You know the sad part of all this? All good, Godly, humanitarian ideals have been villified by Rush Limbaugh and Co. The word liberal induces the same Pavlovian response as "commie" or "child molester."

If the knuckleheads in this country who claim to know their scripture would ever open their Bible and read it, they would see that Jesus (PBUH), and all the prophets, we're liberals.

That's what happens when people too lazy to read close their Bibles and tune into Pat Robertson and John Hagee. They get a false message. They get ordained Rush Limbaughs.

[researcher]

Richard I see it going the other way. As America loses its wealth and the middle class I see Americans becoming more conservative to try and hang on to what they think they have.

This Iraq war is just a misleading short-term blip in anti conservatism.

Hope I am wrong as this evangel neo con conservative agenda is the very essence of evil i.e. ignorance.

[Dantheman99]

While Conservatism has failed America and at every policy level, and I really wish the Presidential candidates would actually talk about why conservatism doesn't work, however they are too afraid of anything resembling ideology creeping into our political discussions.

However, there is no guarantee that conservatism will replaced with something progressive and liberal while the systemic, deeper threat to our system is corporatism.

Corporate campaign money is rotting our political system from the inside out and it's just as much a problem as conservatism.

While conservatives will never allow meaningful campaign finance reform pass, let alone public financing, the Democratic Party should refuse to take corporate cash because it is polluting and corrosive. One doesn't need a law to do the right thing. It's not an issue of unilateral disarmament, it's an issue of integrity.

[nuQlerOstrich]

Then support the candidate who refuses the corporate cash. And he needs your small donations to compete with the Hillary/Obama/Edwards's.

Do it even though people like Chris Matthews and George Stephanopolis disparage him.

Oh, if you don't know who I'm talking about, he's the guy who saved the Cleveland Municipal Electric Company [Muny Light] from corrupt corporate take-over when he was "the boy Mayor," honoring his campaign promise even if it meant the end of his political career. An honest man who kept his promise to the people of Cleveland.

Or else vote for one of the other warmakers, and get what you deserve.

[samguy]

For some reason, like Rosie O'Donnell, I never cared for Belzer as a comedian or for an actor that much. Then years ago, he'd come on to Howard Stern during the news and cracked me up. Rosie, I got into thanx to her blog. Now the two of them are voices that have my ear, not to mention my respect.

[Purple Girl]

apparently the new bin ladin video is out - he claims we only need to convert to Islam- Shut up you crazy fanatic- we have enough troubles with our own crazy ganatics- they just want US to convert to christianity. Same shit different name- add the fanatic jew too- gotta be fair & balanced. Unfortunately for the rest of US were caught in the middle of thier "holy war" OXYMORON. The first worse institution man amde was Organized religion- Faith and communion are intimate relationships, not defined by any other man, not limited by any other man-because it comes from within each one of us, and everything we have been left responsible for - we are the worlds stewards whether we like it or not. they are right about one thing there are zillions of false prophets- butwrong because there is also the possiblity of zillions of saviors. i'm not into their self fulfilling prophecies of 'judgement day' or even a hear after. Heaven is on Earth, you assholes.
But Osama must be pleased we have done what he had probably figured we'd do (not a mental feat) we devoured our own freedoms out of fear. Of course this appears to have ben Bush's goal too and continues to be so inlight of his BS regarding Iran.
I'm not affliated with any religious doctrine- but I hope that these meglomaniacs are right and I get to see THEIR god judge them. Because if they are half right in all their centuries of 'interpretating' the 'words' of their man made books, I think they may be in some trouble. Regardless if they are sent to 'Heaven' I don't want to be there, so Hell sounds like a better deal. Plus SHE won't pardon their trespasses against humanity and the Earth. The oldest true miracle and thus faith has not weighed in yet. CAVE ADSUM boys!!!

[hoyarugger]

Thought Provoking Post but just a couple of thoughts:
Hobbes wrote his magnus opus in response to the civil war going on in England and the carnage it was producing. The natural state of man was and is a philisophical tool of sorts to explain political theory- not what he advocated, in fact his theory was in response to such bruttishness(ok not a word). Liberty from fear of harm from others is what he saw as Government's main role. The meaning of the various theories expoused by great thinkers should always be taken in their historical context. As a critique of 19th century Capitalism Marx's work is brilliant; as a utilitarian theory it's a disaster.

Likewise Jefferson's vision of Federal government was the antithesis of what most liberals today are advocating- he wanted a very small decentralized federal government that would not even have a central bank ( which he opposed vehemently) much less the huge federal agencies necessary for ", healthcare, college grants, headstart, maintenance of roads and bridges, public defenders, job training programs, Medicare, Medicaid" etc. The Classic Liberals of the time believed in freedom of the individual- in fact the word derives from the Latin word Liber- to be free. But that freedom was from government control (then embodied in the monarchy).

[Swift2]

Actually, I'm a Hamiltonian on that.

The truth is, Jefferson's vision was also of a nation of independent farmers. He himself was bankrupt when he died. He hated slavery, and had children with his slave and didn't free his slaves as Washington did. His problem was he had no vision of development. Hamilton's future for us was of the leading industrial power in the world. Not bad, in sum.

Now development has to be green, and that's fine.

Marx was doing pretty well with me until he got frustrated with the rate of change and had the second worst idea in the 20th century: the dictatorship of the proletariat. The worst? Well, the master race, of course.

[WWWoDMOCRATSoORG]

Mr. Belzer, I have enjoyed your work in comedy. Thank you for speaking out against Republiklan party regressivism.

Anyone who reads this comment, I suggest you begin telling people to call major Republican contributors and demand the progressive legislation we want in this country.

Also click on see my profile for action you as a citizen can take to hit the Republican party over the left field wall for a home run.

[SweetJudith]

MAHER AND BELZER
2008

[csavage]

A couple of thoughts
Conservatism is hardly what the ruling class espouses-George Will first called it neo-conservatism for a reason. Our current government is a big, intrusive, costly bureacracy that gets by with the financial help of the Chinese. The neo-cons stay in power because they promise the one thing joe blow public wants to hear-"we'll cut your taxes"
The current crop of Repubs are hardly conservative
Second, American society as it stands now is hardly prepared to deal with liberalism as espoused by Jefferson. To work toward "the common good" we have to have a sense of "common" or community. With our highly segregated housing-by both race and income, our highly segregated worship, highly segregated education, what is it to be an American?
Do we have a common ancestry? No
Do we have a common culture? No
We have an ideal of individualism, from when this country was first settled and through the settlement of the west. We have a vast economic potential coupled with no sense of community-our government has always had to fight influences that would seek to divert that economic potential of the many for individual private gain-it was true in the era of the railroad, it was true in the era of big oil and it's true in the era of the military-industrial complex. Once that external control is removed or not enforced-anti-trust laws- the trend toward consolidating capital in the hands of a few begins anew. Our culture doesn't stand as a unit and say "We are Americans and we don't do that" because we have no community and no culture

[oafishcad]

We do have something that's supposed to be common to ALL Americans. It's called the Constitution. While Bush and his minions have done much to destroy it, not just in theory, but in reality destroy it, the tattered remains are still our commonality. And his destruction of it should be reason enough for his impeachment and imprisonment.

[emerger]

Richard! You rock man. Someday I hope these AM radio personalities are exposed for what 'they were', which are the junkyard dogs of runaway capitalism.

[jackjett]

Conservatisim died the day George W. Bush lead this country into a needless war that has killed thousands.

The only ones that remain are those that can not admit they were wrong and those that are fearful of being charged with war crimes.

In the long run, people will see that Jeffry Dahmer was a better man than George Bush.

Jack Jett

[godlessclif]

Wikipedia does not have an image of Richard Belzer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Belzer

Could someone more techi than I load one?

[KenTao]

Heck, I thought this would be easy but when I went to Wikipedia to try I found you actually have to OWN the copyright to any photo you upload there. Go figure. I guess this just aint the internet no more.

So, it's up to you, Mr. Belzer. If you want a photo of yourself on your Wikipedia entry you've got to upload one that you took yourself!

BTW, this is the photo that I picked out from the internet, but couldn't put up:

http://eur.i1.yimg.com/eur.yimg.com/ng/mo/premiere_photo/20060320/11/2062902954.jpg

Earthlings Unite!