About Me

Name: The Proud Liberal
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Are Conservatives slaves to "consensus?"

Posted by The Proud Liberal on Monday, June 01, 2009 9:33:16 AM
On "This Week" yesterday, George Will commented on the subject of the Supreme Court suit brought on the issue of gay marriage. Will advocates that we wait until a consensus is formed, rather than sue the Supreme Court. Will says a consensus is forming and either stated or implied that consensus was forming on a state by state basis and that we should "let democracy work" by letting the consensus form over time, though he didn't say how much time he has in mind. I think he feels that consensus if forming in favor of gay marriage, but he didn't seem to consider the possibility that a consensus might form in opposition to gay marriage, and then what, i.e., one of the reasons he opposes the Supreme Court suit is that the consensus if forming in favor of gay marriage, he says.

This reminds me of what conservatives said prior to legislation to make Negros equality. Back in the day, conservatives said that society is "organic" and grows organically. They said that a consensus is forming around equality for Negros and that we, American society, ought to wait for that organically formed consensus to jell. In time Negros will learn to "take personal responsibility" and whites will come to accept Negros who have learned to take personal responsibility and, thus, no legislation will be necessary. We will evolve, through markets, to achieve racial equality. One got the feeling that conservatives were speaking in terms of waiting another 50-100 years for this consensus to form. Of course they never did raise the issue of the consensus being formed in opposition to equality for Negros. (We should take as a given that Negros would be in favor of equality and so the consensus we are speaking of is a white consensus.)

This raises the question of whether there is any room in conservative philosophy "to do the right thing." Suppose the consensus formed that was against Negro equality. Suppose the consensus forms that is against gay marriage, which might well happen since the vast majority of people are heterosexual. Are conservatives slaves to majority rule? Even when or if the majority is wrong or immoral?

I think Will, unintentionally, raises questions about the contradictions of democracy, about how consensus is formed, whether consensus is invariably rational or primarily emotional.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Conservative Confusion on "Equal Opportunity"

Posted by The Proud Liberal on Sunday, June 08, 2008 9:40:09 AM
Conservatives are quick to point out that individuals are born with variable talents and that the distribution of variable talents within society lead to variable consequences. The fact is on most things there is a range from lowest to highest, i.e., athletic ability, mathematical ability, honesty, integrity, etc. It's logical that consequences should not be equal.
 
Conservatives, however, usually draw very narrow conclusions about the variability of talents and traits and personality and temperaments within society and the human race. Usually, conservatives constrain this correct observation to the disposition of wealth. They point out, again correctly, that those individuals who have the most of a particular talent will be the most successful in that area and, in many cases, success will be accompanied by money. The good society, conservatives say, will provide everyone with an equal opportunity to compete against one another, enabling those with the most talent to achieve their just deserts.
 
At the same time conservatives fail to recognize and respect human variability in the area of sexual traits. Some people are highly sexed. Some are not. Some people are very masculine or very feminine, some are not. Conservatives fail to grant equal opportunity in the expression of sex. Conservatives retreat to a belief that there must be a standardized, not variable, sexual distribution.
 
This is a confusion and a contradiction in conservative philosophy which conservatives do not recognize about themselves.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »