![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Toward A More Constructive Dialogue
I could have phrased Monday night's entry more tactfully, and probably should have. Several people whose opinions I value and respect have noted that accusing those who disagree with you of being stupid, deluded or worse will win no converts and prove no points.
With the outrage and frustration filtered out, what I was really trying to say was, "What are you people thinking??"
On that level, this was not an entirely unsuccessful attempt at communication. Several of you did give some indication of what you've been thinking.
You think, apparently, that George Walker Bush is a "conservative".
Please note that I did not attack the conservative philosophy. I did not claim that one had to be Stupid, Deluded or Corrupt to adhere to conservative ideals. While I disagree with many -- though not all -- conservative positions, while I am in fact far more willing to proudly embrace the label of "Liberal" than any candidate endorsed by the Democratic party in well over a decade, I can indeed see the logic and the internal consistency of conservatism.
The single author who most deeply influenced my personal philosophy is well-known -- even infamous -- for his conservative views, particularly later in life. I may have reached different conclusions than he did, but I still hold his opinions and his thought processes in the deepest respect.
I think, however, that, were Robert Heinlein still alive, the regime of George Walker Bush would horrify him.
He has, in![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
hafoc's words, "...betrayed the good conservative principles while throwing all his strength behind the bad ones."
With the outrage and frustration filtered out, what I was really trying to say was, "What are you people thinking??"
On that level, this was not an entirely unsuccessful attempt at communication. Several of you did give some indication of what you've been thinking.
You think, apparently, that George Walker Bush is a "conservative".
Please note that I did not attack the conservative philosophy. I did not claim that one had to be Stupid, Deluded or Corrupt to adhere to conservative ideals. While I disagree with many -- though not all -- conservative positions, while I am in fact far more willing to proudly embrace the label of "Liberal" than any candidate endorsed by the Democratic party in well over a decade, I can indeed see the logic and the internal consistency of conservatism.
The single author who most deeply influenced my personal philosophy is well-known -- even infamous -- for his conservative views, particularly later in life. I may have reached different conclusions than he did, but I still hold his opinions and his thought processes in the deepest respect.
I think, however, that, were Robert Heinlein still alive, the regime of George Walker Bush would horrify him.
He has, in
hafoc's words, "...betrayed the good conservative principles while throwing all his strength behind the bad ones."
no subject
no subject
If you didn't serve -- and, once again, "service" in that book was not simply military -- if you didn't demonstrate through personal sacrifice that you were psychologically capable of at least occasionally putting the needs of the community above your own personal convenience and comfort -- you didn't vote. And you sure as hell didn't hold office. And you sure and hell didn't get to send people off to die when you yourself had done everything in your power and your Daddy's power to keep your precious lily-white fake-Cowboy Ivy League ass out of precisely that situation.