Ti-Guy gets it exactly right back here:
If they refuse to operationalise "conservatism," then it's impossible for them to expect anyone to come up with examples of "anti-conservative bias;" it just ends up meaning highlighting anything a so-called conservative doesn't like.
Precisely. These days, it would appear that the definition of "anti-conservatism" is to simply point out what kind of ignorant, criminal hypocrites these people are. For example, pointing out Stockwell Day's scientific illiteracy is not anti-conservative, it's anti-stupid Fundamentalist dipshit, if you catch my drift.
Similarly, Canada's wankheads seem to have their knickers in a twist over the alleged anti-conservative media coverage of Brian Mulroney. But I'm thinking this isn't so much anti-conservative as it is anti-"Guy who secretly takes payoffs in the form of $1000 bills stuffed into an envelope." I'm sure you can appreciate my point.
So it's going to be hysterical to watch the examples of "anti-conservative bias" pile up over there at Dumbfuck Central. And when it comes to all that alleged pro-lefty bias, I'm guessing the operative word is going to be "fungible." Go ahead -- tell me I'm wrong.
4 comments:
This kind of nonsense started decades ago (at least, that's when I became aware of it). So-called "conservatives" focus on the excesses of economically liberal societies to formulate their own definitions of liberalism. Pornography, drug abuse, excessive reliance on state welfare, abandonment of deference to religious authorities, declining standards of public behaviour...those have become manifestations of liberalism for them. Thus, anyone opposed to those things is "conservative."
They've managed to develop this by sheer dint of lack of experience and a surplus of ignorance. They never noticed that, during this period, liberals/lefties and progressives were by and large vocally critical of the same sorts of things, but understood them more in terms of economics, or urban planning, or the nature of power and less in terms of "spiritual corruption." Even more so, progressives of all stripes performed the analyses and reached the conclusions necessary to propose policy to address these failings in some concrete way, rather than what conservatives have chosen to do: lecture, hector, badger, pander and insist on a return to some mythical simpler time when everything was better.
There are so many things (largely libertine, anti-child, or hedonistic and incautious) that are genuinely anti-conservative, but they shouldn't be scrutinising the public broadcaster, the news media and popular entertainment in general to find those. They should take a good look at advertising and commerce in general and, quite often, their own bad behaviour.
In the end, you cannot have a conservative society with neo-liberal economics without it become more authoritarian, and if they don't come to grips with the fact that the rest of us will fight tooth and nail against authoritarianism (which is what liberals fundamentally oppose) they're just not going to get anywhere.
Funny -- a little while ago I seem to remember accepting money in envelopes was a sure sign of a political party's pure and unending corruption. Or has "Librano$" suddenly fallen out of fashion in those circles? It hadn't last time I checked.
The shameless misappropriation of the term “conservative” is something that vexes me no end. It was kind of a recurrent theme over at my old place. I had to laugh at one commenter who complained that it was “liberals” who seemed more concerned about labeling conservatives and defining them than so-called “conservatives” did. (Being utterly lacking in introspection, apparently.) Well, quite so.
Just look at the sort of astounding fuckwits who cloak themselves in the term “conservative” to mask their naked greed, stupidity, ignorance and bigotry… Ladies and gentlemen, I present: Rush Limbaugh, the Asscyst Emeritus of the wholly fictional “Institute for Conservative Studies.” Of course, he’s nothing more than a bloviating right-wing crank and shill for the corporate elite, but the term “conservative” is so much more, um, respectable, is it not?
The debate between “liberals” and “conservatives” as framed by mainstream press and more especially right-wing radio and other media outlets is completely specious and defined along terms that are remarkably simplistic and cartoonish. The hijacking of the term “conservative” by comedians like Limbaugh and Coulter should be an offense to any sentient person with authentically conservative sensibilities.
RT, Limbaugh and Coulter are not "comedians." They can claim until they fall down blue in the face that the outrageous things they said were "Just Jokes" when people call them on their eliminationist bullshit, but that doesn't make suggesting Tim McVeigh should have blown up the New York Times funny.
Post a Comment