News Snipet 'Blog

sorry about all of this. i dont think im the author of any of those statements, but still.

 

CH!!! NO apology from you! You are both a gentleman and a scholar.

I am looking at it strictly from an academic viewpoint. I am working on an article based on a theory of mine (based on one of Winston Churchill's statements), and it has to do with this topic. I will make sure I give you a preview prior to publishing.

I meant it truthfully when I said that I am not particularly offended, just that I was curious about the mind behind such. I remember the locker room talk from when I was young, and realize too that adults engage in such when speaking with one another--but I got to thinking that it was another thing to actually write it.

What are your thoughts?

-Jack

 

Jack, I do want to weigh in on this, but it will be next week before I can do so. Carry on in my absence. :-)

 

Hey I havent disappeared, just a little busy recently. I will do my best to have a reaction sometime this weekend. A non-profane one. Even if I disagree with you. That isnt a knock at anyone, its just gotten way tense lately. BUSH IS TEARING US ALL APART!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Hey CH!

Ha!

But in all seriousness, I am working on an article about a lot of what I pick up on in liberal circles. This is strictly academic on my part, CH. Also, I don't mean to sound arrogant with my assertions and observations.

You are right. There seems to be a bubbling rage out there on the blogosphere and even on the streets. I'm not sure if it comes from many people's feelings of impotence/helplessness or what it might be. Also, I don't know how old you are, CH, but this has existed before Bush. It seems to have amplified though since 9/11. I personally don't think Bush has much to do with it--I am neither a supporter or detractor. He is one man with limited powers, and since he is human, I tend to look in my own life and wonder if I would have done any better.

I DO have theories...

One is, that any time there is a shift in ideological powers, society reacts. For example, when liberals are in charge, the population may react to what they do and try to stop them. (One hears much about heritage, the good 'ol days, tradition, values, etc.)

When conservatives are in charge, society reacts by trying to put it into motion. (One hears a much about progress, movement, etc.).

Given the current political and social climate I submit the following for your thought.

CH, it is near impossible to move me to anger, and I know that many of my conservative friends are slow to wrath also. Many of my conservative friends are as old as I am:) I also know that I am more conservative now than when I was young. When I was young, I was brash, hotheaded, impulsive, reckless, progressive, and dare I say, liberal. As I matured, my perspective changed. Things became less black and white, I started reacting less, planning more, considering and analyzing, became more careful (stogy/conservative), deferential, risk averse, resistant to change and a lot of other things associated with "old age". I look at many who I would consider conservative and see the same characteristics. I know a few young people, even, who are amazingly mature and level headed and are almost as conservative as me. I recall you saying that you are often more conservative than many "conservatives" you know--CH, I think that has to do with your level of maturity. (Although maybe I'm not amazingly mature and level headed.:)

My liberal friends are different (though I love them no less). Most of my liberal friends are younger, and remind me of myself when I was younger. They think similarly, react similarly, and seem to live similarly. My older liberal friends are interesting too. What I find interesting about them is that they seem to live for today, the future be damned, and there is not much in the way of planning or organization in their lives. They tend to spend what they make, live paycheck to paycheck, some go without insurances, have no savings or wealth building system, etc. Many of them are not very well to-do because of their chosen life styles or savings/investment perspective.

Putting this into historical perspective:

Although there was much rhetoric and posturing during the Clinton years, there was little rage and irrationality from conservatives being bandied around when liberals were in much control of the government. When Clinton was impeached for perjury, most of the Republicans who were in those proceedings were even-tempered people who usually gave consideration to what they were doing. That's not to say that they were not surrounded by a shrill, emotional and vocal opposition, and shrill and mean spirited support. Liberals during the Clinton years were largely quiet unless it came to defending Clinton of whom they iconically identified with. We never had an anti-war protest under Clinton even though he was guilty of more military actions than Bush. We heard nothing when he pushed for most favored nation status for China, creating larger trade deficits. (There are many examples) It seemed that the left was largely quiet, because they saw themselves in charge and were secure in that thought.

Even before George W. Bush took office, the left and liberals became increasingly vocal. I have witnessed blind rage and even hatred from liberals since "conservatives" have been in power. I have witness vitriolic statements, hate speech, and even talk of murder from people who fancied themselves peaceful and tolerant. What had previously been just a mild din, increase to a cacophony of chaotic chatter. Liberals became the "kooks" they always criticized, giving in to wild conspiracy theories and fits of paranoia. Liberals began to see what they thought was their power slipping from them, and they reacted with little thought but with great EMOTION. The ones they sought out as leaders of their movements were the most vocal and emotional, and anger all of the sudden became the vogue. This is when I began to take into consideration that maybe Liberal vs. Conservative was more about aging/maturity or the thought processes associated with it, than with ideology, etc. CH, I am speaking strictly in a clinical sense--just trying to put 2 and 2 together. Of course, I can't say things like this to some, because they would react emotionally and with great offense.

I remembered the quote attributed to Winston Churchill "If a man by 20 is not liberal he has not heart, if a man by 50 is not conservative he has no brains" (or something similar to that) and began to wonder if contemporary American liberals were just adults who have not completely matured. One expects young people to be crusaders, idealistic and out to save the world, but we old people are just tired and worn and just want to be left in peace. I observe, in a macro and generalized sense, the behavior of many who consider themselves liberal and find similarities to behavior we attribute to children. Things I noticed are: Resentment of authority, narcissism, reactionary behavior, empirical self-righteousness, empathetic cognition, displaced culpability, concrete thought, and short-term outlook. I am working to document each of these, and think I may be on to something.

Now, CH, this is not a slight, these are observations. I have gathered a lot of data that suggests this may be so, and am seriously looking for feedback concerning my findings. If this turns out to be correct, then could it be that the heightened emotion we are experiencing in the United States is the result of liberals reacting to feelings of powerlessness? Hightened emotional content within society?

I thought about what I said to Shea about my conversations with him reminding me of the ones I have with my young daughter. I probably shouldn't have said that, because in retrospect I could see how someone would find that offensive, but I was just fascinated by the similarities.

CH, I have a very inquiring mind, and I look at these academically. Its not to cast dispersion, just to look at cause and effect relationships and see what makes sense.

Ok, I am an incredibly long winded old cuss, so I'll get on to the last issue we encountered. I really didn't mean to enrage Shea, just provoke him. I think that he takes much of what I say personally. Smorg made a good point when he mentioned that people do take things personally when generalizations are made. I need to be a little more sensitive, but I tend to have gotten a bit more direct the older I get. A "lack of tact" my wife calls it. Although my statement was made for impact, it was an honest observation on my part. I have listened to the mainstream media, read many left sites and blogs, and all of them seem to echo that democracy was beyond the reach of the middle easterners. This is a common thread I see in much of what the left says. One reason I am in tune with it, is because of what we have spoken of before, that the left seems to look down on others (pity, superiority, or something) and think that they are the solution to the world's problems. They are often on crusades saving the world (I know, I was young once and had similar aspirations). I see a lot of self-righteous crusading, Kennedy, Kerry acting like they are for the common man and want to help them, but doing little or nothing personally from their swollen coffers. Does that mean that all liberals are such? No, there are many liberals out there with good hearts DOING what is in their hearts. But there are also many who are not--To me that is hypocritical.

Ok, let's get to the part where you disagree with me. What exactly is that?

I always appreciate your thoughtful and ordered perspective.

-Jack

 

I am 24 years old, turning 25 the 23rd of this month :) The use of profanity- thats something I can touch on- one could write a book about profanity, its uses and its purposes. I sometimes get profane, maybe more than sometimes, and its more of a mechanism to emphasize my thoughts and feelings. There is just something about seeing the F word in print that catches ones attention. Of course, it is something that can always be used to attack as well. Profanity runs in my extended family, I find it to be genetic and I get it from my Mom's side- her Republican brothers- in other words I do not see it coming from one ideology more or less. Then again, there are certain types of conservatives and I know my conservative uncles arent the same type of conservative that you are. For some reason, that America should act as a policeman in the world is often a conservative philosophy.

There was a short period of time when I was hotheaded, angry and all that. Maybe I still am, but not as reactionary- I am more analytical, pensive, then reactionary nowadays. I didnt really get into politics until I was about 21 years old- and when I read Al Franken's Lies, this changed me for good. It set me on a path to try and figure out what really is going in our world today. I started to read Ann Coulter's articles, watching Bill OReilly and Sean Hannity- sitting there and taking it all in. I paid my 8 dollars to see Michael Moore's movie, which I still cannot see the point he was trying to prove.
I think a major problem for the conservative ideology is that, in the media, I have yet to see a solid conservative voice. Ann Coulter is not it, Rush and Sean are not it either. All the big names out there for conservative America are not it. I think the ones that may be more with it are the ones who rarely get attention in the mainstream- typically the ones you reference here. There is that John Leo, Ralph Bristol. Andrew Sullivan is another one who I can listen to, and agree with. That, in turn, leads to a lack of, and a false understanding of conservatism- I know it isnt what I hear from Fox news- that is more of a Republican apologist station. The only one I find to stray from that agenda, to an extent, is OReilly. I mean, I think he is slick and you know where he comes from, but he, for some part, attempts to engage the other side in discourse and seems to be more with it than most give him credit for. I tend to disagree with him on issues of the day but if I were to bloviate with Bill, we would come away with more agreement.

One area where I have seen myself become more conservative is financially/economically. What you are saying is dead on- their lifestyles, their spending habits, lack of restraint- something I never had. I got out of college, began my work for a mutual fund transfer agent, learned the system, learned mutual funds, have taken courses about the industry and I have a great knowledge of it now and what it can do for people if you believe in the system, discipline yourself and get organized.
My proudest moment (not to undermine my years of education and all my parents provided) was opening my Roth IRA in 2004. My poor old grandmother gave me AND my sister 2000$ for our college and high school graduations, respectively. It was a gift, but I took also as a test- what was I going to do with this? Now, I had family my huge family throwing money at me for finishing school, but coming from my grandmother, given all she has endured in life, it was different. I knew I couldnt put this in the bank- it would be gone before the end of summer. I invested it, and I thanked my grandmother, not so much for the money, but what it set in motion for me. Ive tried to organize myself financially- I dont save a lot, or make a lot, but Im not even two years removed from college. I used to panic and get nervous about these things, but I dont think so much short term anymore as I do long term.
And Clinton- he is more of an icon than anything it seems. I definitely was not paying much attention during those years, but the genereal attitude seemed to be that all was well, everything was great, nothing was wrong. Clinton's blunders seemed few and far between compared to this administrations, but there had to have been blunders. I watched the Al Qaeda biography last night before I went to bed- his handling of them, for example, is a blunder. There were certain reasons for this slow reaction, but the threat they posed was not perceived. The man was no saint.
And when the Republicans began to take control, oh was there ever outrage in the way matters were handled, and there was anger like I never thought I would see. Both sides had their roles, I wont get into that, but its amazing how childish both became in these matters. I really think the main dividing factor between the two parties is our foreign policy and how we relate to the world, and how we think we should relate to the world. The issues of the day hardly ever seem to be internal as much as having to do with foreign governments. We do not spend nearly enough time attempting to fix our problems at home as much as trying to run the world. Look at New Orleans, you were there, what have they done since the hurricane? I mean, we are dropping billions of dollars for this endeavor in Iraq, meanwhile, our own people are just sitting there living in filth.
Now, it can be so difficult for me to disagree with people with discussions like these- this is more like a seminar right now. When it is not one specific issue (Terry Schiavo, port security, the war), but a discussion of how our society relates to one another across political ideologies, who is wrong and who is right? I dont know. Im not trying to cop out at all Jack, as much as take it all in and forumalte my opinion- something that is going on every day, constantly evolving, and will constantly evolve until I get up there in age myself. But power- that is something I can touch on- neither side likes being out of it and when they are, they may react and not reorganize. Liberals want it back bc they believe they know what is best, republicans want to keep it and will do anything they can to. When it comes to power, this is my problem with us having only a two party system- it really is suffocating us because all we ever get caught up in is red v blue, left v right. What is left and what is right though? I have a republican friend who I was talking to who indicated, "you seem to be confused politically." I said, you bet I am. I told him I am more libertarian than anything and that I have overlapping views. I am socially liberal, but not when it puts others at a disadvantage. I call myself a social liberal but do not agree with affirmative action. In a discussion we recently had, I said I sympathized with the intentions, and I do, but its not the answer. I will not ever hate someone or think they are evil for having ideas how to elevate our society, even if I disagree with them-people tend to forget what this country is about. A big problem is the people always thinking/knowing they have to pick one side over the other- imagine what a multi-party system would accomplish for the people? We may for once have accepted diversity of thought, it would require more discussion and it would have perspective.
I see what you are saying with the left looking down on others- especially in regards to the Iraq conflict. One specific are where I disagree with you here is HOW you assume the left feels that Iraqis are inferior and incapable of democracy. I think (well, I hope) that the left says this and believes this as a result of cultural differences. Democracy, on the surface is the greatest form, because the people decide what they want. However, in our world of imperfect human beings, nothing is ever as it appears on the surface. I find that, with the Iraqis, and the different groups and the chaos within the region for so long, it is impossible to go in there and force the people to adopt a certain system. It seems so easy to us, bc its all we have ever known, but they do not know democracy or understand it. I find religion plays so prominent a role in their lives that it makes their decisions for them and has already decided. I find that different groups are unwilling to compromise their beliefs in order to form a more perfect union for everyone else over there- especially when its America forcing them to do it. I would love to see them come together, be peaceful and coexist- and NOT as the result of fear of a dictator who would murder them if they didnt.
I just find it to be an unwinnable situation given that region's violent history and overall cultural differences. Its funny, though, how liberals or even conservatives talk about religious intolerance in our country today- I dont think we have any idea what religious intolerance is. I will say this, while its so difficult to fathom why people would not want to come together and live in peace and equality, I am in a place where I can and will- if they dont want it, I dont care. I dont agree with the way they want their government to be- but as long as they can exist without threatening their neighbors who may not think like them, Im cool. And this is why I think we need to wipe Al Qaeda off the face of the earth- because they will not peacefully coexist. Perhaps they came to be as a result of our foreign policies- but you know what, Saudi Arabia snubbed bin Laden by inviting our army to come in and resolve the crisis in the early 90s. I dont agree that we should have stayed there and occupied, but it is absolutely cowardly to hide in the shadows and murder innocent civilians who generally have no idea about how their government or their military operates. At the same time though, the left is a little too lenient on these people who have been apprehended- if there are innocents among them that is horrible, but I am willing to bet there are some evil, guilty people among them too, who deserve to be imprisoned. Bottom line, America is not always right, and I feel that constantly being involved in other countries affairs leads to more problems than solutions, especially when we really do have our own issues at home that we should worry more about- I think we have witnessed this first hand the past 20 years especially- but there is never justification for murdering innocent civilians who just wake up, go to work, are trying to provide for their families and live their lives. Ive never disagreed with going after those responsible, sometimes I disagree with HOW we did it. Even further though, I am thankful that I am not the one responsible for such decision making. Imagine the stress?

 

CH,

I have always been impressed with your reasoning. Even moreso.

Want to co-author? :) Maybe if we did we could figure it out together. I will say one thing, I wish I had the same degree of wisdom you exhibit when I was your age.

CH, if you want to see what a true conservative believes, study William F. Buckley. I happen to believe that true conservatives are rarities in the United States anymore. What are called conservatives are not--they are just reactionaries. One of the things that I tend to look at is that over time we have become more liberal in society--are we better off than we were? Well, definitely we can say we are in some respects, in others not.

I think that problem with the "left" and the "right" is that neither of them are listening to one another. Both sides have strengths and something to offer, but neither is willing to listen.

Thanks for your comments on the profanity. I have read profanity in fiction before, and seeing it in discussions on the net was a new thing for me. I have been curious about it for some time.

EP said that she was going to weigh in on the issue...I look forward to her comments.

Regards,

-Jack