I'm not a "we must over turn everything" kinda guy but do liberals actually believe their ideas are not subject to change?
Reading Walter Russell Mead's (who I generally followed since his excellent essay on the Christian right a couple of years back in Foreign Affairs but I've taken a step back after he outrageously claimed Obama was in Jefferson's class) take on Clarence Thomas it took me back to the impressionable 1980s. Back then, all I remember was how stupid Reagan was and to a lesser exent during the Anita Hill trials, how immoral Thomas was.
It was pretty apparent watching the news and listening to my teachers. It was the thing to think. Back then there were no popular conservative radio or television shows. The only real source of consistent conservative messages were magazines. Conservatism was an obscure political entity (libertarianism was further "out there" mostly reserved to depict deranged people with assault weapons) even though the concept of conservative values remained very much alive. The transmitters of information weren't conservative nor did they bother to present that point of view. Looking back, I get the sense no wonder there's been an explosion in conservative popularity. In the post-war era, liberal doctrines DOMINATED the continent.
And so be it. Nothing to sneer at. It's just that, honey, I need a change.
I think it's good we're seeing many intellectual and political outlets outside the conservative-liberal dynamic. Today, one can easily reach out to or be exposed to a host of philosophies including libertarianism - which is evolving at a rapid pace - anarchism, socialism, etc.
Thomas was considered a clown but now he's the architect of the destruction of liberalism? Which is it, man?
Things change.
No?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Mysterious and anonymous comments as well as those laced with cyanide and ad hominen attacks will be deleted. Thank you for your attention, chumps.