Oh Boy! My political tag surfing is filled with short circuited conservatives.
It is really an exercise in mental gymnastics, reading up on all the political conspiracy theories going on. One post suggested that sensible theory regarding a political endorsement (that Bush is keeping a low profile in the McCain campaign), represented the “kind of thinking” we would be subject to under Obama. What?
I get a kick out of how some conservative minds work; they describe a context to their liking, with its own built in assumptions, then blame the liberals for not being able to think right, like them. Then these folks go on to use that as an example of some sort of liberal press conspiracy, or “the kind of thinking” under Obama. Oh my gosh! Now, if I do not agree with someone it is evidence of their unwholesome scheming nature? Wow!
A basic context is excluded by conservative mindsets; liberalism is inclusive, while conservatism is exclusive. Liberals do not intend to eradicate conservatives, yet as the Rovian plan played out; conservatives planned to eliminate liberalism’s influence. It seems conservatives see liberals from their own exclusive mindsets. They then assume lliberalism is the enemy of a sorts. Seems conservatives cannot comprehend the expansiveness of liberalism, and instead, insist it is a view closed in some way as their own.
Then it follows that it must be closed against them. Many conservatives believe in their own perfect world or world view. Problems do not issue from perfection presumably, so they must all be caused by…, Exactly! Liberals fault! Those different thinking people. To conservatives, debate and democracy are inherently antithetical in action, though they might claim to be fore those abstractions, in the abstract. They have a bias against democracy, as well as much liberty for it implies expansion. These legitimate children of freedom must be called names and be told they are unwholesome. And on that, conservatism delivers day and night, 24/7. The liberalism of the US Constitution, and Jesus Christ, must somehow be reversed. This seems to have become much of modern day conservatism’s purpose and passion around the world.
We need not look too far to see why some conservatives only look for responsibility outside themselves. No one can force them to think about anything new in a new way. Change equals bad. No one need tell them anything about anything outside of their ideological boundaries. No one who thinks differently than they do, need think they can be right and a conservative wrong. (The consequence of not being reality based in any objective like way.) With such faith in ones own infallibility, established in some from their view of faith itself, countervailing truths will be seen as deception.
Another post said, that since coverage of Palin is so negative, it is proof of a negative biased liberal media. Maybe true. Then again, there is so much important negative information about her. She is in the position she could be the president any day if elected VP. This information must be seen, all of her evasive rationalizations, for instance, about most any subject asked of her regarding the role and function of the federal government, weigh heavily in voters consciousness, and should. I hardly think one needs be “fair” or superficially “balanced”, and so come up with the same amount of positive info. It was found that that same allegedly liberal media favored Bush in 2000 by a 2 to 1 margin. And that was because…?
In politics, what a candidate is missing in can become all of our problem, as Bush and Cheney have so superbly demonstrated. But then, journalist have some duty to find an equal number of positives? That would have been real odd during war time if the same standard applied to being informed of our enemies perspective. But then, why then does it not? What kind of conspiracy is that one? Liberal media patriotism conspiracy? Here I am showing how circular this, who is what and when, can go.
How would that even be conceived of qualitatively, when reality is neither fair nor balanced? And of course, what if the most important things do happen to be the negative for one person and positive for another? How is serious consideration served by balancing them with something else, that in effect, becomes diversionary? Oh, and if one has not noticed, the McCain campaign has next to nothing positive to say of Obama unless it is to bolster their own view, does that make all their accusations right? Will McCain supporters have to balance these negative Obama impressions with positive ones? Should the media be “fair” and only show Obama’s point of view to counter his opponents negative ratio dominance?
I can be wrong about just about anything. To prove me wrong is to prove me right, in that I will attempt to reestablish my perspective on truthful information given in truthful context to reflect the new reality. What point is there to living in a distorted world view? Yet how we perceive reality itself; does much to tweak our perspective to or from actual reality. If I cannot admit or comprehend my own pre existing biases, I cannot honestly perceive or receive what is happening now.
We all have ideological lenses, but one based on being open to changing ones mind is superior to mindsets that cannot admit mistakes, or that their ideology; their political or even religious bias, can contain wrong notions. Liberalism accepts this intrinsic predicament in becoming more objective. Overall. Conservatism has no such allegiance to adjusting to Living Truth in the now. It avoids contradiction by denying the evidence. There is increasing evidence of conservatism in the US, in some circles, seeking to make its world view the only acceptable one. This is a threat to democracy itself.
Liberalism’s strength of openness is considered a weakness by conservatives– because liberalism does not accept the restrictions imposed upon objectivity by an unalterable pre existing bias. Liberalism can contain the world of diversity and ambiguities. Does not make liberals always right, or say that democracy does not have negative qualities to address, that cannot permanently be fixed, for they are related to unpredictable discrepancies in human nature.
While for conservatism at large; only their way is right. And in all respect and fairness; that is a highly problematic cosmological view in the face of diverse cultures and human conceptions toward reality. Like or believe in reality or not.