Thursday, October 1, 2009

● conservatism

. . .

"That which is public is socialist, and therefore, evil."

The way to keep power and money in check, is to have a working free press continually keep the pressure on, by asking the tough questions and insisting on accountability.


conservative |kənˈsərvətiv; -vəˌtiv|

holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion.
  • Unadventurous, especially in terms of culture, tradition, politics, philosophy, thinking, and the creative arts : No Risk & No Reward.
  • (of dress or taste) sober and conventional : a conservative suit.
  • reactionary, traditionalist, orthodox, old-fashioned, set in one's way.
  • tending or disposed to maintain existing views, conditions, or institutions : conventional and narrow-minded.
  • marked by moderation or caution (a low estimate)
a person who is averse to change and holds to traditional values and attitudes, typically in relation to politics.
  • advocating support of established institutions
  • a supporter or member of the Republican Party in the U.S.A. or a similar party in another country.
  • (public opinion) liberals and conservatives have found common ground in support of a public healthcare plan.
  • (government policy) liberals and conservatives have found common ground in support of private industry.

conservatism |kənˈsərvəˌtizəm| noun : (from Latin: conservare = "save" or "preserve") refers to various political and social philosophies that support tradition and the status quo.

conservatively adverb
conservativeness noun

ORIGIN late Middle English (in the sense [aiming to preserve] ): from late Latin conservativus, from conservat- ‘conserved,’ from the verb conservare (see conserve ). Current senses date from the mid 19th century onward.


Cultural conservatism

Cultural conservatism is a philosophy that supports preservation of the heritage of a nation or culture: jingoistic or jingoism.
In the subset social conservatism, the norms may also be what is viewed as a question of morality. In some cultures, practices such as homosexuality are seen as immoral. In others, it is considered immoral for a woman to reveal too much of her body. The economic, political, religious, cultural, and social oppression of others is not only seen as legitimate, but as admirable and moral.

Religious conservatism

Religious conservatives seek to apply the teachings of particular ideologies to politics, sometimes by proclaiming the value of those teachings, at other times seeking to have those teachings influence laws. Religious conservatism may support, or be supported by, secular customs. In other places or at other times, religious conservatism may find itself at odds with the culture in which the believers reside. In some cultures, there is conflict between two or more different groups of religious conservatives, each claiming both that their view is correct, and that opposing views are wrong.

Because many religions preserve a founding text, or at least a set of well-established traditions, the possibility of radical religious conservatism arises. These are radical both in the sense of abolishing the status quo and of a perceived return to the root of a belief. They are ante conservative in their claim to be preserving the belief in its original or pristine form. Radical religious conservatism generally sees the status quo as corrupted by abuses, corruption, or heresy. The evolution of a society (such as openness, sexual awareness, tolerance and appreciation for others, and diversity of almost any kind) can trigger a violent cultural collision with conservatives.

. . .


The way to keep power and money in check (to keep them from taking your money, time, and rights) is to have a working free press continually keep the pressure on, by asking the tough questions and insisting on accountability.

Many conservatives have the opinion that reporters are annoying. This would make sense if they (conservatives) were big business owners engaging in questionable activities. Unfortunately, most conservatives (small-town school teachers, small business owners, middle class, and poor alike) have this opinion about journalists who question the business practices of the rich and those in power who benefit from or support their actions. Many have the impression that the press is socialist, intellectual snobbery that's trying to destroy America, and that the wealthy business owners are the victims of free speech gone mad. These average americas (middle class and working poor) who have fallen prey to corporate propaganda don't even realize that they need their civil liberties, let alone how their very freedom depends on these "annoying" reporters keeping power in check.

Conservatives will always see the press as liberal, because conservatism is all about conforming to the power structure (the Establishment). The US, and now the world, is ruled by corporations, and these corporations, by their very nature, are right-wing institutions. When people conform, they don't conform to the disenfranchised, they take the easy safe road and conform to the authorities, and the "authorities" in the US, answer to the real authorities, the business leaders and multinational private bankers. Even the Fed is a private bank, owned by individuals, not the public. The word "Federal" in the Federal Reserve is intentionally deceiving. There is a Federal Board appointed by the President, named by the bank owners, to oversee the bank's operations, but the owners (as in any business) have the most power. It's always a power struggle between business leaders, the 3 branches of government, and the citizenry. The citizens usually lose, having less money and power (and hence, influence), because many of them (conservatives) have been convinced that they don't really need their rights, and should do little to help the poor (to level the playing field), but instead, should give to the top, only to ensure that the divid between rich and poor ever widens.

Big business owners are right-wing because that's how they make their living, through private industry. Government officials are right-wing (even the democrats) for campaign contributions from private industry. The media is right-wing because the media are corporations, which inherently have right-wing (corporate or private) interests. Conservatives are right-wing, because their need to conform overrides their need to seek the truth. Honestly seeking the truth is too risky for them because it could mean going against the opinions of their family, church, and/or tradition. And, this goes against their priority of putting jingoistic loyalty over honest analysis and self-reflection. They choose their team and fall inline, and defend their team regardless of the facts, or even unwittingly, their own interests.

You will never (or very rarely) hear that "the media is conservative" within the corporate media, because this is an unacceptable opinion within right-wing institutions. Most of the complaining about the media, within the media, comes from the right, because (obviously) the media is on the right, hence the popular phrase "the liberal media." Once you're convinced that the media has a liberal bias you won't even consider opinions that are outside the mainstream and to the left of the corporate media. This is intentional, because it keeps the public from asking the real questions about our institutions. Also, people have a hard time believing that so many could be deceived (especially themselves) even though it has happened to practically every society throughout history. If you believe that the media is liberal, you then might turn to right-wing talk radio and fall into the abyss of lies that plague this nation.

All one has to do is look at the past 30 some years of deregulation and realize what that means: we are moving to the right. Even the democrats (the "left-wing/liberal" party) caves to corporate interests over public interests almost every time. This is the definition of being right-wing, and a realization that we have no viable left-wing political party in the US. In a time when a so-called "socialist" leader can't even pass a Public Health Care Plan, because private insurance companies have too much power and influence, even though the majority of the public wants health care for all, we can see how this trend of moving to the right could play out. If everything public is deemed as ineffective "evil" socialism, we could eventually lose our post office, parks, public libraries, and even our public schools. And with the rise of the unaccountable corporate militaries, a frightening future may await. Once you realize the corporate media is right-wing, you might move to the left to find the truth. You might actually read or listen to Naomi Klein, Howard Zinn, Jeremy Scahill, Amy Goodman, Ralph Nader, Jeremy Rifkin, and Noam Chomsky, people who actually support their arguments with facts.

No comments: