The Republican party is not a big tent. It is more like a Boy Scout Jamboree involving four different troops (corporate elites, military hawks, libertarians, and social conservatives) who basically hate each other. The thing that keeps them together is that they hate the Girl Scouts more. That, and a word, “conservative”, a word that they each understand in very different ways.
Many of those who call themselves “conservatives” hold views are not really conservative. I would use the term “Neocon” for them, except that term has already been taken to describe a group of social liberals who are hawkish on foreign policy, particularly with regard to Israel. So, for reasons that will become clear, I will use the term “Con”.
Here are some of the key differences between conservatives and Cons:
- Conservatives believe in fiscal restraint. Cons routinely run up huge budget deficits.
- Conservatives believe in preserving the environment. Christian conservatives talk about the importance of stewardship of the earth God has given us. Cons, on the other hand, oppose any sort of environmental regulation and favor opening up wilderness areas to exploitation for profit.
- Conservatives like to stick with things that work. Cons have been pushing supply side economics for more than 30 years, despite evidence that it does not achieve the promised result of a vibrant economy for all. Despite all the good achieved by Social Security and Medicare for almost all Americans, Cons are anxious to replace them with unproven alternatives that do not actually provide security. (Though, to be fair, they do greatly increase the amount of money Wall Street has to play with.)
- Conservatives like to avoid risk. Cons embrace both financial and military risk.
- Cons were happy to sit by while Wall Street drove the economy over the cliff. In fact, their policies of shifting wealth upward and deregulating the economy were a heavy foot on the accelerator.
- Cons pushed for the Iraq invasion without realistically considering potential consequences, including the consequences that actually ensued. The Cons told us that the war would be over quickly, the Iraqi people would greet us as liberators, and that the war would pay for itself. Nine years and trillions of dollars later, we are still in Iraq.
So anyone who is careful about the English language should not use the word “conservative” when referring to Cons. The term Con is appropriate for other reasons.
- Cons purport to be constitutionalists, but they favor a convoluted construction of the Constitution. For many Cons, the Constitution starts halfway through the First Amendment, and includes the Second and the Tenth Amendments, and not much else. As they are big on law and order, Cons are not fond of the Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Forget about the Sixteenth Amendment. In 1798, Cons would have been anti-Federalists, but to hear them talk, they are the real experts on what the Constitution means. Confusing, no?
- Cons exhibit supreme confidence in their opinions, and contempt for the opinions of those who disagree with them. Cons have strong convictions; they are convinced they are right before they have heard the other point of view. They often maintain those convictions despite evidence to the contrary. Cons are never mistaken. So they cannot learn from their mistakes. Cons had the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives between 2000 and 2006. None of the urgent problems facing the country were solved, and when things predictably blew up, they looked for other people to blame.
- When it comes to votes on important matters, Cons are not pro anything; they are. well, con. This is a natural consequence of a key Con belief – that government can do no good. What is not so clear is why people who don’t believe in government insist on being in charge of it.
- Cons are extremely concerned about the issues facing the country, but their concerns are highly concentrated. Cons were so outraged at the 2,977 lives lost on 9/11 that they invaded two countries, killed at least half a million people at the cost of almost 15,000 additional American lives, and spent almost 4 Trillion dollars. On the other hand, Cons seem to have no concern for the 26,000 American lives lost each year for lack of health insurance, or the 30,000 to 40,000 American lives lost each year as a result of gun violence. Cons prefer issues where there is an enemy, and where fear can be whipped up, and have little patience for long-term issues that require us to make sacrifices for the common good.
- Above all, Cons have to stay in control. Cons emphasize issues not so much because they want to solve problems, but because they want to keep the base motivated, i.e. afraid. They spend a lot of time talking about hot-button issues like, abortion, guns and taxes, but are short on legislation. Staying in control means maintaining party discipline regardless of real principles. When the choice is keeping control or adhering to principles, cons choose control every time.
LIke Humpty Dumpty, cons want words to mean just what they choose them to mean. Thirty or so years ago, Republicans took it upon themselves to re-define the words “liberal” and “conservative.” Today I would wager that less than half the country could tell you the difference between a liberal, a socialist and a communist. But much of the electorate holds the fervent belief that liberal is bad, and conservative is good. So politicians proclaim themselves conservative without having to say what they really believe.
But there are too many pressing issues facing the country today for us to make decisions based on labels. It is time that we insisted on truth-in-advertising for politicians. The next time a politician trumpets his or her conservative values, you have to ask – a conservative, or just a con?
