A Thing I Don't Get

[forsyth]

Republicans in specific and conservatives as a whole seem to believe two things that sure seem to me like they contradict.

First, that government is inherently inefficient and corrupt and unable to handle even the distribution of well, anything, well. And is always attempting to expand its power for nefarious ends, at the expense of you and me.

And secondly, that we should all shut up and trust the government to know best in anything relating to war, crime, security, foreign affairs, or anything related to the above.

I really just don't see how those two mesh.

Comments

[megpie71.livejournal.com]

It all makes perfect sense when you realise that the first is when they're *not* in power, and the second is when they *are*.

Or in other words, "when we do it, it's okay".

[jokermage.livejournal.com]

Conservatives, like liberals, are not a homogeneous group. There are libertarian conservatives (government is evil) and there are statist/authoritarian conservatives ("pappy state" neocons). Even then you have divisions based on whether social conservatism or economic conservatism is more important. You also can have social liberals who are economic conservatives (typical examples would be Arnold or Rudy) or social conservatives who are economic liberals (sorry don't have an example).

[forsythferret.livejournal.com]

In theory, that's true. In practice though, the modern Republican party is not libertarian at all, except for their devotion to tax cuts, which is more to benefit wealthy donors. And they at least give lip service to social conservativism, but in practice have really implemented little of it. But most of their language they talk about has been about how government programs (such as Social Security and Medicare and so on) are bad and going to run out of money, but also to shut up and trust the President or else the terrorists will get ya.

And I disagree with all the people (mostly conservatives) who are now trying to claim Bush et al aren't real conservatives. The Bush administration is the natural evolution of the forces within the Republicans that brought us Nixon and Reagan and Gingrich and so on.

[jokermage.livejournal.com]

I wasn't talking about the Republican Party, I was talking about conservatives in general. Not all of them like the wasteful spending, social conservatism and invasions of privacy. It almost seems like you're making a strawman conservative who nods enthusiastically whenever Bush speaks. The range of conservatives is much broader. A lot of the inconsistency you've seen is partially due to differences between different conservatives and to obligations to those factions.

If someone said liberals are inconsistent because they are typically socialists but always side with Hollywood, it would be the same kind of thing. There are some liberals who don't like Hollywood, and there are others who don't like socialism. There are others who don't like either and some who like both.

[forsythferret.livejournal.com]

Well, I was talking about the Republican party in specific, and only secondly conservatives in general, so that's probably part of the problem. But there's been precious few conservatives of any stripe speaking up against Bush for most of the past six years, either.

Yeah, some of it is trying to pander to the different factions, the religious right for example, has mostly gotten words and a lot of cuts in foreign aid for family planning clinics of any stripe. But that's about it. The libertarians, such as there are, have just gotten tax cuts. The corporate types have gotten tax cuts and massive war contracts and flunkies appointed to oversee them. And the neocons have gotten their war and the destruction of diplomacy, and are pushing for a war with Iran, because the one in Iraq is going so well.

I really don't see why libertarians continue to pretend the Republicans are better for maximizing freedom. I guess it's a matter of rhetoric and tax cuts and "drown government in a bathtub" wishful thinking.