commondreams.org

Alright, lets break this down. I didn't find many correct statements from this man after the first intro paragraph several paragraphs so let me explain what conservatives actually believe.

"The central issue in our political life is not being discussed. At stake is the moral basis of American democracy." - Correct

"The individual issues are all too real: assaults on unions, public employees, women's rights, immigrants, the environment, health care, voting rights, food safety, pensions, prenatal care, science, public broadcasting, and on and on."
- Sort of correct. Assaults on Unions, public employees. Sure, they're paid better than the private sector anyway (do the benefit math). It can't all just come from taxes.

Women's rights = code for abortion or else its just wrong. Conservatives find it wrong to kill children. Ooh how terrible. Most have no problem with other women's rights.

Immigrants - What rights do they have in America beside free speech, the right not to be killed, detained unlawfully or tortured. NONE. If you want to argue more than that you have to argue natural rights and that leads you back to the Lochner era and liberty of contract. (Read Justice Sutherland)

The environment - Too many conflict opinions if you want to talk about global warming. No complaints about recycling and other basics. Wish we had a better program where I live.

Healthcare - Show me where anyone has a right to healthcare in the constitution. You'll read many references to that document in this explanation. There is no positive liberty to health care but there are rights to avoid compulsion from the government.

Voting rights - Only conservative complaint in my state is all the dead people voting and the unions intimidating people into voting a certain way

Prenatal care - Again, back to code for abortion. Still don't agree with it. Most conservatives don't have a problem with prenatal care aside from the stipulated aside.

Pensions - Yes, we believe that you shouldn't get a pension for working in government and that you should save for your retirement yourself. Scary thought, self-reliance.

Science - No problem there except when people try to force feed unproven or discredited theories.

Public Broadcasting - Don't have a problem with the broadcasting, just with the liberal slant. My kids don't need to know about homosexual behavior when they're three. I don't hate the people and anyone who kills or hurts someone for homosexual behavior deserves to be punished. I still think the act itself is wrong. Deal with it, I have a right to free speech and you can't prove that it's right. You can only prove that you believe it should be socially acceptable.

"Budget deficits are a ruse, as we've seen in Wisconsin, where the governor turned a surplus into a deficit by providing corporate tax breaks, and then used the deficit as a ploy to break the unions, not just in Wisconsin, but seeking to be the first domino in a nationwide conservative movement."
- Yes, conservatives don't like the unions. Not because of what they do for people but because of what they force people to do against themselves. Unions force membership and then use the money of people who disagree with the Union to lobby for something contrary to their beliefs. It's just a form of slavery and yes, we're against that.

Deficits can be addressed by raising revenue, plugging tax loopholes, putting people to work, and developing the economy long-term in all the ways the president has discussed. But deficits are not what really matters to conservatives. - Tax, Tax, Tax and a misguided belief in Keynesian economics. It doesn't work on the long term, just the short term and we're in way over our heads right now.

Conservatives really want to change the basis of American life, to make America run according to the conservative moral worldview in all areas of life. - Sort of correct. Would we like it if people agreed with us, absolutely, but we still believe in personal liberty. The same could be said for liberals. Liberals want everyone to conform to their worldview as well, which is the whole point of writing an article like the one I'm correcting.

"In the 2008 campaign, candidate Obama accurately described the basis of American democracy: Empathy -- citizens caring for each other, both social and personal responsibility -- acting on that care, and an ethic of excellence. From these, our freedoms and our way of life follow, as does the role of government: to protect and empower everyone equally. Protection includes safety, health, the environment, pensions and empowerment starts with education and infrastructure. No one can be free without these, and without a commitment to care and act on that care by one's fellow citizens." - Just going to skip to the "No one can be free without these" part. If no one can be free without these then no one can be free because forcing people into something, even if that thing is good for them, is still taking away freedom. The loss of personal liberty is paramount to a conservative.

"The conservative worldview rejects all of that." - Incorrect

"Conservatives believe in individual responsibility alone, not social responsibility." - Incorrect. Conservatives believe in social responsibility through individual responsibility. Not the forced distribution of their goods in a manner of which they might not approve. Planned Parenthood is a great example. I'm willing to feed someone, I'm willing to help them buy clothes, but I'm not willing to pay for them to kill a child.

"They don't think government should help its citizens." - Incorrect. Conservatives believe that the government shouldn't help more than is necessary. Welfare programs tend to cross that line, again because of the lack of control over how those welfare dollars are spent. Conservatives would much rather help on a one to one basis than as a part of a collective.

"That is, they don't think citizens should help each other." - Incorrect. Conservatives don't believe in compelling people to help each other but DO believe in helping others.

"The part of government they want to cut is not the military (we have 174 bases around the world), not government subsidies to corporations, not the aspect of government that fits their worldview." -Not really correct. Some conservatives don't want to cut military, others like Ron Paul want to cut it very badly. Conservatives are fine with cutting subsidies of any kind (or should be). I never met a government subsidy that I didn't want to cut.

"They want to cut the part that helps people. Why? Because that violates individual responsibility." - Sort of correct. Cut the part that helps people yes and help people in a way that is not a part of the government, again where there is control over their own resources and they're not funding things that are contrary to their values.

"But where does that view of individual responsibility alone come from?" - Skipping this because there's nothing to say.

"The way to understand the conservative moral system is to consider a strict father family. The father is The Decider, the ultimate moral authority in the family." - Possibly correct but not really. Yes, the father leads the home but it is based upon counsel within the family itself.

"His authority must not be challenged." - Sort of Incorrect. It's fine to challenge that authority. To challenge the ideals held. But yes, once father decides something there is an expectation of Unity within the family. Note the subtle difference here. Liberals complain about the loss of personal liberty within the family but are more than willing to take away the individual liberty of head of the family either in his/her role as the head of the family or as an individual.

"His job is to protect the family, to support the family (by winning competitions in the marketplace)," - Correct

"and to teach his kids right from wrong by disciplining them physically when they do wrong." - Incorrect. It's about being effective, not about just physical discipline.

"The use of force is necessary and required. Only then will children develop the internal discipline to become moral beings." - INCORRECT. Oh my goodness. We don't go around hitting our kids for the fun of it. It's not always necessary and it's definitely not required. It's another tool in a parents bag and should be a last resort, but still an option.

"And only with such discipline will they be able to prosper." - Incorrect as phrased. Only with disciple will anyone be able to prosper, but discipline can take on many forms. Jazz can be an essentially formless discipline but it is still an accepted profession, if you can make it.

"And what of people who are not prosperous? They don't have discipline, and without discipline they cannot be moral, so they deserve their poverty." - Wrong again. Conservatives don't believe that they deserve their poverty, only that poverty is what they have earned, which indeed they have. Again it's back to the "poverty should be cured as an individual level instead of as a part of the collective" thing I was talking about earlier.

"The good people are hence the prosperous people." - Incorrect. People aren't judged on how good they are in business, they are judged on their character. Back to the old school yard motto, it's not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game.

"Helping others takes away their discipline, and hence makes them both unable to prosper on their own and function morally." - No, charity is an important ideal to conservatives, but again done on individual terms.

"The market itself is seen in this way. The slogan, "Let the market decide" assumes the market itself is The Decider." - This is actually a logical fallacy. It's generally referred to as the shifting definition fallacy. The whole argument behind "The Decider" was an attempted indictment of the patriarchal order that assume the father governs. A market is not a person, it does not decide anything. It doesn't have the capacity, especially with the idea that people are judged based on their earnings gone.

"The market is seen as both natural (since it is assumed that people naturally seek their self-interest)" - Yes

"and moral (if everyone seeks their own profit, the profit of all will be maximized by the invisible hand)." - No, there is no judgement of morality placed upon the market. The market is a tool not a god. It does not dictate right and wrong. It is an expression of individual collective action.

"As the ultimate moral authority, there should be no power higher than the market that might go against market values. Thus the government can spend money to protect the market and promote market values, but should not rule over it either through (1) regulation, (2) taxation, (3) unions and worker rights, (4) environmental protection or food safety laws, and (5) tort cases." - Completely wrong. It is not a moral authority, nor is it a higher power. Conservatives don't want to protect the market, they want it left alone. Just let the market be. I'll go through the list one more time (1)Regulation is generally bad, but we're not anarchists. Minimal regulation is preferred. (2) Taxation is not bad. Extensive taxation is bad. Many conservatives would like tax reform, not tax annihilation (I admit there are some wackos out there but they're not the majority). (3) Unions should not be able to de facto enslave people. Still back to that one. In general, we have no problem with unions as long as they are voluntary. (4) Nothing wrong with environmental protection or food laws. That's just made up. (5) Torts are fine, though we could use some reform.

"Moreover, government should not do public service." - Incorrect. There's nothing wrong with essential services.

"The market has service industries for that." - Correct but I don't really want to trust a business with police work. That's just scary.

"Thus, it would be wrong for the government to provide health care, education, public broadcasting, public parks, and so on." - Again, incorrect.

"The very idea of these things is at odds with the conservative moral system." - Incorrect.

"No one should be paying for anyone else." - Incorrect. It should be stated that no one should be involuntarily paying for someone else or for a service with which they disagree.

"It is individual responsibility in all arenas." - Do I even need to say Incorrect this time around? It's individual social responsibility.

"Taxation is thus seen as taking money away from those who have earned it and giving it to people who don't deserve it." - Not to people that don't deserve it, but people who haven't earned it. And again, it's back to the individual social responsibility to make sure that things are taken care of. "

"the Taxation cannot be seen as providing the necessities of life, a civilized society, and as necessary for business to prosper." - Again, in moderation taxes are fine.

"In conservative family life, the strict father rules. Fathers and husbands should have control over reproduction; hence, parental and spousal notification laws and opposition to abortion." - Incorrect. It's a collaborative effort, but a decision made by one side cannot be made to terminate a life that two sides created. The abortion thing is back again and no, we still don't like to kill children.

"In conservative religion, God is seen as the strict father, the Lord, who rewards and punishes according to individual responsibility in following his Biblical word." - Incorrect. God doesn't want to tell everyone exactly what to do. How tedious. He's there as a loving and supportive parent who counsels with us and sometimes punishes us when we do something egregious.

"Above all, the authority of conservatism itself must be maintained. The country should be ruled by conservative values, and progressive values are seen as evil." - Yes and no. Not the authority of conservatism but the right to be left alone and the right to decide as an individual and not merely as another voice in a collective. See the bill of rights for further explanation.

"Science should have authority over the market, and so the science of global warming and evolution must be denied." - Incorrect. There's nothing wrong with evolution and global warming has been discredited in many scientific circles.

"Facts that are inconsistent with the authority of conservatism must be ignored or denied or explained away." - Incorrect. If science has something to say, let science be heard. Lets start with the brain not being developed until 25 years old and changing the voting age.

"To protect and extend conservative values themselves, the devil's own means can be used again conservatism's immoral enemies, whether lies, intimidation, torture, or even death, say, for women's doctors." - Completely incorrect. Still back to the doctored up baby killing argument for points. Sorry, still don't want to kill kids and we're fine with punishing those who do. Conservatives are accused of both moral strictness and moral ambiguity in this article. An odd combination. Pick one. Again, this is conservatives in general. It's no more fair to accuse the main body of some of this stuff than it is to accuse liberals of wanting legalized abortion because it cuts down on the black population. The facts are consistent with the assertion but that doesn't make it true.

"Freedom is defined as being your own strict father -- with individual not social responsibility, and without any government authority telling you what you can and cannot do." - Do I even need to say anything at this point? Social responsibility through individual actions. Government is okay as long as it's limited. Again, not anarchists, we just believe in moderation.

"To defend that freedom as an individual, you will of course need a gun." - Poorly timed indictment of the right to bear arms. Again, see the bill of rights.

"This is the America that conservatives really want. Budget deficits are convenient ruses for destroying American democracy and replacing it with conservative rule in all areas of life.
What is saddest of all is to see Democrats helping them.

Democrats help radical conservatives by accepting the deficit frame and arguing about what to cut. Even arguing against specific "cuts" is working within the conservative frame. What is the alternative? Pointing out what conservatives really want. Point out that there is plenty of money in America, and in Wisconsin. It is at the top. The disparity in financial assets is un-American -- the top one percent has more financial assets than the bottom 95 percent. Middle class wages have been flat for 30 years, while the wealth has floated to the top. This fits the conservative way of life, but not the American way of life.

Democrats help conservatives by not shouting out loud over and over that it was conservative values that caused the global economic collapse: lack of regulation and a greed-is-good ethic.

Democrats also help conservatives by what a friend has called Democratic Communication Disorder. Republican conservatives have constructed a vast and effective communication system, with think tanks, framing experts, training institutes, a system of trained speakers, vast holdings of media, and booking agents. Eighty percent of the talking heads on TV are conservatives. Talk matters because language heard over and over changes brains. Democrats have not built the communication system they need, and many are relatively clueless about how to frame their deepest values and complex truths." - Going to chime in right here. Studies (science) actually indicates that liberals are more prone to get their news from television and have a larger representation in that media. It's actually a fairly clever word game to refer to talking heads in this sense but it's actually inaccurate to say that there is a more conservative representation than liberal.

"And Democrats help conservatives when they function as policy wonks -- talking policy without communicating the moral values behind the policies. They help conservatives when they neglect to remind us that pensions are deferred payments for work done. "Benefits" are pay for work, not a handout. Pensions and benefits are arranged by contract. If there is not enough money for them, it is because the contracted funds have been taken by conservative officials and given to wealthy people and corporations instead of to the people who have earned them.

Democrats help conservatives when they use conservative words like "entitlements" instead of "earnings" and speak of government as providing "services" instead of "necessities."

Is there hope?


Well, if the conservatives act in the way I describe and the liberals decide that killing children isn't the only right worth fighting for or talking about then perhaps there's some hope. Not all liberal ideals are bad. Free speech is great and one we can agree on. Freedom of the press seems to be one that liberals are in favor of as long as the press doesn't include fox news. Religion is great as long as conservative religions are excluded from that protection (and not the ridiculous one that was described here).

It's late so I'm not going to bother proof reading tonight, it's late. If there are mistakes I leave it to your mercy and understanding.