What’s Wrong With Conservatism?

A PERSONAL INQUIRY INTO THE COSMOLOGICAL FACADE VIEW OF A FULL LIFE

img_1894

An Epistemological Viewpoint

What happens when objectivity itself, is made relative to group identity? The World view, the view of the self and of existence, dives deeper into the subjective. Things like being an American, are now deconstructed into becoming, ‘The Real America.’ , inferring real Americans, or in other words; re-framed identity internalized separation. And followers seem fine with the idea. Abstractions are used to deny some of a nations citizens consideration from their full presence as Americans, while ones own group is assumed to be their standard bearers, even amidst the startling contradiction generated regarding the self and an other. This is what subjectivity in group identity, as a defensive/offensive based abstract ideological interpretation, does to once inclusive concepts.  Beats a lobotomy?

In today’s world, it is as if a broken record insist it is still fine, just continue spinning it.

We humans look into the world, the natural world, and see a kind of knowing we may not be certain of ourselves; instinct and intuition. Flowers seem to know what to do. Many animals seem, or act as if they know the next thing to do. We intuit our own needs from inner desire, then go about trying to fulfill them. We wish to belong to an absolute knowing, a confidence in Being that is beyond question, beyond fearful doubt.

I have seen in my life, and the lives of others and of many animals, a sense seeming to “know” when to fear, when to be insecure. I have also seen how this apparent knowledge, theory or fantasy, can undermine what is assumed to be my interest. This then leading me down a path of a kind of ruin in regard t the true facts of matters. I have seen ones own fear and insecurity eat one up alive from inside. Somewhere, without knowing it, ones knowing can become false, yet ones own life seem to prove it true beyond doubt.

We are challenged, whether we admit it or like it or not, to find what is really true, actually correct, if we our to advance own interest in being fulfilled. We are truth seekers looking for facts that will prove their value as truth. The fact is that some of our abstracted laws we assume to be correct may be always changing appearance, for our idea may have never been actually complete. This is part of the struggle of civilization to move toward a more complete state of human being, more near the facts of the Ultimate Reality imbuing the universe beyond our subjective abilities to misread It. It is my view, that Love and Forgiveness are qualities of being that can transcend our divisions in knowing, actually bypassing our own ignorance and its certainty’s. Providing us with a pathway to exit circular states of conflict and misunderstanding.


Particularly since the economic collapse in progress, the anarchy, or predatory/free market capitalism’s faithful continue to insist it is the Way, while government intervention in the economy is not. I like how someone just put the issue on Rachel Maddow’s show; ‘That government regulation of business is like having a bumper car, but by taking the bumpers off, you have a demolition derby.’ But it seems some conservatives cannot exit their broken subjective paradigm.  The chaos emitting from deregulation, a prime cherished “value”, must be reaffirmed or re-framed with other perspective that makes it seem not wrong, despite overwhelming evidence. The FIX is on them, and unfortunately, they only see us as requiring to believe in their way as well.

It is surreal to hear the allegedly conservative party suggest the very mechanisms that are implicated in today’s economic mess, as the new solutions. This is what cult like thinking, or unsubstantiated faith, will do to you; Faith and belief can, and often are, manipulated behind your back by clever opportunist. I guess Darwin rules?

The conservative metal paradigm is closed in upon itself, yet from the inside alone, they cannot perceive it. Their minds are blocked from integral and integrated perceptions of the whole of society, or the world as one process within a larger One Process. Conservatives are primed to feel both defensive and threatened with extinction by liberalism. Notice conservatism’s appeal is most often to engendering fear and insecurity, then selecting out liberalism as the target. Someone like me putting this out makes me the target of some as well; Conservatism cannot admit to error in a fundamental way, for their paradigm is that they are the only answer.

It seem conservatives cannot understand that liberalism is not for any one form of conservatism, but actually for them all! The object of what are called Progressives, is to work toward a society that works for all and addresses the difficulties of all. We do not, then, all “get our way” exactly. In that, liberalism is a unifying approach that is inclusive, it will seem to not favor any one conservative aspect automatically over another, nor necessarily new ideas. Although liberalism as practiced by many a liberal, will seem to jump to new ideas without thorough questioning or reviewing the preexisting conceptual relationships.  Freedom and Liberty and Justice are all essentially children of Liberalism.  For some, this is seriously problematic to making exploitation and opportunistic endeavours seem right.

Reality, and the full empowerment’s of societal contract abstraction (freedom, liberty etc), is to be liberalism’s sorting mechanism, and not how someone does not wish change in realization of ideology per say. This seems not a good thing to the self interest of self conserved and obsessed mindsets. Certain more embodied truths, truths fulfilled to their abstract proclamation, can become incomprehensible to subjective bias as ones point of orientation. Now what becomes seem are threats which need interpretation.

The actual motivations as to why conservatism appeals as a response to stress? Comfort is gained in seemingly clear good and bad definitions that place oneself squarely into the good, the bad in someone and somewhere else. Now, one knows who to blame, and need not ask questions. It is a fundamental mathematical error drawn out into sociological and cosmological definition. But from the end of a blind, or more correctly, blinded alley, the world seems as filled with other blind alleys.

What popular conservatism as defined today does not, and seemingly cannot comprehend, is that by biasing itself to subjective consideration of fact and of idea, it diminishes critical thinking ability to discern truth, or reality correctly. Prime example; The public conservatism “movement” today is against an allegedly liberal (corporate) main stream media. Yet what exactly do they propose, one run by one conservative viewpoint? With liberalism being inclusive and conservatism essentially exclusive, a free press and media (presumably liberal by definition of openness) represents a problem to different factions of conservatism. The conservative news show, for instance, was on the same network with the most sex and violence in its programming. One side of conservatism working against the other, validating the other, as they blame liberalism for the result.

I use this example of how liberalism is perceived. Many of the modern conservative rejection retorts to a liberals position often go something like this; If I say I am intolerant of intolerance as a liberal, I will be called from the abstract, intolerant. The liberal position can then be dismissed as self contradictory, instead of actually promoting tolerance in the full implementation of the abstract collective sense. (Tolerance is referring to an opinion of objectionable others who are not actually violating others rights to exercise their rights.) The right wing is full of these out of context abstraction based turn around “proofs” of liberals and liberalism’s alleged contradictions.

Blind philosophical alleys are someones home; They become decorated; They grow histories and mythologies; They become everything. It seems to be the place where life and love comes and goes, a clear place of living; The All. Then, from beyond these alley walls, indications of others, and of alien idea. These are “naturally” threats to a myopic indoctrination of a mathematical error in perspective. The error is ones inability to see the connection to math of abstraction and individual realization to all citizens, or to Life itself. The error is unaccountable to others subjectivity.

Liberalism (which essentially produced democracy, freedom of speech, human rights etc…) is a more advanced means of exploring and discovering unified reality, yet it comes to represent an other to some. It looms to the possessive of subjective identity, as very worrisome, a threat to existence. They must then focus on liberalism’s assumed misuses and unresolved dysfunction as reason to eradicate it.

Next part 2

Then into the world comes conflict of interest

.

Part Two

-Then into the world comes conflict of interest-

How do relative impressions of good and bad come to bias ideas of right and wrong? Why is ad-hominem consensus confidence rampant on the right? How can a closed paradigm adjust to a changing world when its very base tenets become irrational?

Hint; Try to deny the relevance of the change. Inculcate irrational thinking; deconstruct critical thinking abilities. Find pulpits and other ways of continuous indoctrination to do the thinking for the followers who (parenthetically) know they are free thinkers. The best mind control is invisible, it is believed to be the truth.

I came across a right wing conservative bloggers post today, a familiar thing happened; I was expected to have a feeling, an attitude over a truncated contextual perspective of the “truth” (about the ex-president). I believe this blog was even defined with the “Truth” as part of its title. I will mention the point of truth that this article left one with a bit later. It energised me to write my view here.

Truth.

It is as easy to say as most any word, yet it is one of the most subjective and relative notions thrown around in our language today. But one thing should be clear to a rational mind; The more input, more angles and perspectives on an object one can collect, should render a more accurate definition of what is being seen.

This is where science comes in, or the scientific method of observation and interpretation. It is perhaps humanities greatest potential gift, as well as a curse if used incorrectly. All of us human beings are both right and wrong, not always knowing when we are which. It is why any allegedly objective investigation generally does not rely on only one source of information if others are available. It brings a system of observation of detail on a subject as object, that then, is presumed to offer some consistent and more rounded view into the natural world; in how a specific outcome of an action produces some effect. We are born scientist, or truth seekers in this regard; We look for patterns, connections, that seem to be true.

Seeming does not make anything actually true in objective reality, or the real world of cause and effect. Faith, or trust in assuming a truth, is a likely system of false objectivity. Objectivity requires probing and analysis of factors surrounding an object. If I think something is a lie, I can say it is, for it seems like one to me, yet I can be wrong. It can be argued that we never truly understand all there is to know on any issue, for we never know all the questions to ask, nor all the beginnings and endings to influences on energy and object in spacetime. We come to some conclusions, presumably hedging more rightly or wrongly toward any Absolute Truth. This is the relativity factor of unknown and knowable context, a place where we may need to be more humble of our human status, and more honest of our levels of knowledge and expertise.

What has this to do with a failure of conservatism?

Conservatism, presumably, is fixed. Listen to conservatives on many issues, and it is all black and white. You must be for or against something. Nuance and ambiguity are seen as signs of weakness, or of a disingenuous avoidance of clear conclusion. It, absoluteness, is somehow conserved in belief beyond the out-workings and other opinions existing in the world.

Conservatism, then, has a subjective based identity, usually to some specific kinds of human beings and interest as opposed to others. Conservatives do not consider themselves in fundamental union of intention with others outside the conservative mind-frame. When I read conservative explanations of what the “real truth” is, I am often stunned by the truncation of context to the point they are presenting, be it philosophical or practical. This lends them to continuously “prove” or validate their beliefs as opposed to all others.

Conservatism does present the comfort of certainty to those who so imbibe; Your way is the only true way; Your God the only true God; Your economic ideas the only true ones, etc.. There is to be no debate in regard to an objective platform for perceiving reality. Instead, reality is claimed by faith, to reside in proclaimed religious or ideological “truths”. These, (comfortingly for the challenges of critical thinking), are presumed to exist in a question free zone. A permanent status quo. Thousands of these question free zones of ideology exist around the world, all “true”, and many at complete odds if they run into one another.

There may be alleged unions of humanity in the conserved mindset, such as “The nation” or “Children of God” or the human family, the world, the economy, or such other broad context abstractions that appear obvious to those mind-frames. This tends to be where the union ends, in abstraction, which creates its own kind of dangerous paradigm repercussions, of non believers and outsiders, orthodoxy and heresy. Inexplicable others behaviors, seem to appear possessed by some negative charge which becomes magnetically attached to much of the “other” world, even to seem to be evil. A stealthy self centeredness; tribalism, nationalism, economic imperialism, these kinds of basic us and them’s draw a fundamentalist line in full human consideration.

Think back to the rudimentary definition for a truth finding (seeking) I presented. We have a fundamental problem of discovery; Closing down the parameters of investigation to truthfulness, to facts and opinion of cause and effect, cripples the conservative ability to discern truth from fiction. When avenues of investigation are closed down, our ability to perceive the universe as it actually is suffers. This suffering will enter the world. We can see how the most basic psychological conservatism of self centeredness, tribalism, or its modern many-faceted variations of confident subgroup identity, institute a likeliness to conflict when turf borders intersect; Unless the “Other” is made to conform to my conservative paradigm.

Conservatism (just check many of our modern world varieties, and their views toward science in general), conservatism finds inquiry outside the conserved paradigm as a threat. Economic conservatives decried the science on global warming and pollution. Thinking outside the conserved box toward consequences and accountability’s toward ones actions, become tagged as being against (opportunistic) freedom, or free markets. These kinds of absolutes insulated in question free zones, is the objective of many a conservative movement. It is how and why more embodied and accountable democracy and freedom are being deconstructed by conservatives to their “real” view.

The conserved blinded alley seems whole to them. Yes, one way leading out of the alley does have an aspect of connection to the whole context, even the higher truth, but their up close world view reigns supreme. They cannot see the fundamental connection to any objective whole union or the other conserved blinded alleys of the world. And be you blinded or not, being different from the blinded alley view will be interpreted as the otherness of another blinded alley. You will seem false to a conservative whose mind and heart are shut off in a fundamental way to the outside. Context known, as seeming true, rules perception. Until perception can pivot away to the rest of Life and Beingness, conservatism is locked down into perpetual perceptual error; The mistaken as whole view, from the blinded alley.

This mathematical separation in identity corrodes ones place in the world, inclining the perspective toward self centered insecurities.

Certain corporations rejected the evidence of tobacco tar and cancer. Denial and diversion is a familiar pattern for a reason; Conservatism creates its own relative elite, with obvious benefits or privilege to the conserved authority’s status quo; Those who will not be questioned, for they intend to preserve their conserved advantage and status granted by followers. Intrinsic subjective operational insecurities control perception.

If you are making money off of selling something that science is imputing as a hazard, that science will be attacked fo it seems to hurt you. This cognitive dissonant like rationalization seems to always include more “faith based” shaming and ostracism; do-gooders, bleeding heart liberals, socialist, sinister government interfering with your business, tax (and spend!) hike etc. Rationalizations of an emotionally charged nature will be made, that charge influences ones own subjective to relating as negative; to the questioners lacks of integrity, morality or economic rationality. If powerful evidence can have its seeming source imputed, it can be made to seem disingenuous. Bye, bye to scientific observation, and enter emotionalized assumption as a diversion of attention. Conservative campaigns are a study in this process.

Public interest is continuously attacked when it comes to these extended accountability’s for ones actions to a whole beyond the individuals good ideas of the alley based grand view of oneself. Life does not end in influence just because I say my idea of it does. The Universe is a Whole. We can see conservatives speak of that abstract freedom they assume they are defending, versus bad authoritarianism. The libertarian notion of being able to do what one wants, comes to supersede in depth considerations of other cause and effect beyond the freedom to solely monitor ones own life. When it seems to pay ones bills, accountability and responsibility seem to become set free from their debt-full consideration. And that is the nature of opportunism.


Conservatism promotes a kind of idea that infers the individual is totally on their own, to be judged by God or Darwin. Yet they assume many cultural and moral concepts that presume unity, even altruism. Modern world conservative policies are all over the place; freedom for business, love for the unborn, the born, not so much if you are different, no freedom to organize protection from corporate predation by workers, freedom to attack enemies and imprison criminals with socialism’s tax dollars, but no freedom to protect the environment or those who are much less fortunate no matter the amount of alleged individualist abstractions that are said to make them equal.

Now we have so called moral or values voters who believe you can legislate morals. So much for individual freedom to discover truth oneself as spiritual merit. At times I call some of these self imagined conservatives, hyper-left radicals, for they seem to propose many of the ideas and means of implementation as the Stalinist and Maoist brands did (neo-cons?). Having been tricked into being schizophrenic entities, where words are conditioned into an appearance of continuity by the self serving right wings vast taking head establishment, blinded trust is the banked on political commodity. Words like honor and loyalty can be bended to serve any idea right or wrong. Here is where the arts and sciences of persuasion come to mainstreet.

It is a study in convoluted contradiction, a pivot in perception in the span of hours, to hear these folks railing about the liberals in the exact way they were criticizing the liberals for being just weeks ago; AS IF NO ONE WOULD NOTICE! Lectures (and threats) about how one must not criticize a president in times of war instantly evaporated. (And I’m glad they did!) The Faux (conservative) news show hosts are legend for denying they said what they are found saying on tape. That, and often having their facts backwards for ideological continuity’s sake. But this seems to actually seem fair and balanced to many of them, since they assume the mainstream media is believed to be a left wing conspiracy of sorts. While it is more likely a money making conspiracy bordering on the unconscious, that realizes conflict attacks attention and attention gets add revenue.

Next Part Three; The Dissected Self and Opportunism’s Seduction

.

Part Three

img_1439

The Dissected Self and Opportunism’s Seductions

Now the “free from government burden” “liberated” individual is magically to know, or not care where their unhealthy smoke goes or who must then pay for its damage. Opportunism seduces the individual by the stress in their situations. Sometimes this is defined as a crime, but in many other spheres of influence and behavior, it is thought of as good business, a smart move, a lucky break, leading to a healthy return in stock value, sign me up! In other words, succumbing to what was once referred to as temptation; opportunism and denial of negative aspects of ones behavior extending past selfish gain.

This is why much conservatism is often proclaiming its followers as true, loyal, moral, patriotic, values voters and such grand identity tagging; They are being inoculated in self identity as to not including the full or whole consequences owned by their actions. This diverted guilt also seems to send them after the messy nature of liberalism itself, where they can then contrast themselves in clean and straight appearance and assumption, as being above ‘those kinds of people’. Projection is a powerful form of self medication for the unaccountable ego. The right wing ad-hominem machinery does this repackaging service day and night. We learn how to do this selection for ourselves in time, that comforts cognitive dissonance from emerging into the realms of the heart, by gating the mind.

A full looking into these context of the interconnectedness of Life and Being, becomes being against a grand abstraction of freedom; a freedom disengaged from responsibility and accountability. In other words; exploitation of environments for self gain, and then of denial of unintended relationship, as real as that relationship may be proved out to be. Then those of like mind align to define their superiority and good intent. A legion of hired sycophants and worshipers of status benefits will accrue. That old concept of “The Golden Rule” has been abandoned and left to be parted out to ones own special interest. Society, via the worship of competition as the defacto God (winning), seems to be implying, through self centered political actions to, Do unto others before they do unto you.


The Need to Deny Reality with Attitude

Global warming has been attacked for quite a period past the point of overwhelming scientific evidence, as being a relevant association with human behavior. Even so, for conserved economic predatory advantage, it was made to seem as if it was a highly dubious scientific finding regarding the validity of global warming. This truism emerges: Opportunism will bias those with advantage from acknowledging contrary negative evidence of their own opportunistic behavior. Opportunist will then go on to demean contrary evidence AS IF THAT EVIDENCE IS DELUSIONAL.

Conservatism is then, a kind of primal temptation; a carrot or an apple dangling in front of the individual, to grab and make a world view of ones privileged position and access to life by validating ones right to have what one gets and keep it at all cost. I would hazard to say, most unscientifically, that we all are challenged with conservatism’s (reaction withdrawal) temptation to withdraw relevant otherness from consideration. Instead, to identify inwardly into the withdrawn state, a state that may extend its withdrawal from full considerations through entire economic systems, religions, and individual cosmologies that do not serve that withdrawn interest.

Conformity is a hallmark of conservatism, for appearance is paramount as a signal of ones allegiance to superficiality as connotation of deeper shared belief. This conservative assumption by appearance is in effect in many assumed liberal groups as well. Likewise, those outside the conserved identity cues appear as wrong, unprincipled, losers, not hip, or ungrateful in some respect. These rituals and behaviors come to represent the conserved mindsets shortcut to “truth” perception itself.

Not sharing in these (“truths”), or looks, (as many a younger generation may encounter), becomes the subject of ridicule and scorn for not embracing the appearance values of the conservative mindset. Many an adult lectures their children on appearances, not realizing the freedom of individual definition they may well be seeking to inhibit, for the comfortable, clean world view of the conservatives surface oriented good for you paradigm. This, while the conformist believe they are indeed right to the world as they define it. Seeing is believing?

Politics and religion have found a great recruiting ground in subjective validation at the expense of otherness or uniqueness. The collective radar must be unplugged in conservative mind-frames. “The Commons”, or the interconnectedness of ones (all) life across environmental spectrum’s, is generally kept out of rationalization beyond where the conservative notions require for validation.

Although the initial hedge toward conservatism may be a primitive sense of self preservation against all else, in spiritual, economic and societal terms, it propagates us against them mentalities, via its proud subjective focused mathematical error. These become formulas for their own circular logic self validating rationalizations. Outside of conservatism’s subjectivity of sense, we may view conservatism as a kind of near permanent lack of human maturation of perception. Exactly why it attempts to position itself as the mature or sensible perspective; It seeks like minded dependents in fluffing up inadequate ego fulfillment’s or self realization, inherent to insisting on subjectivity ruling in an objective interfaced outer context.

These days this is evident in the ad-hominem attitude pandering propaganda filling the airwaves from the right wing. Rigorous investigations of cause and effect are thrown into the garbage, instead, the attitude that ‘those kind of people’ are producing the problems in the world, has dots of logic connected that are often little more than thrown together opinions from political central talking points, or what one heard on the TV, radio, or perhaps from the preacher, all about an attitude; Those kinds of people.

AND ON A MORE PERSONAL NOTE:

In the political arguments of our time, we have some blurring of epistemology and ontology, along with objectivstic and constructivistic notions of what is real in the world, and how we think reality is verified personally. I actually feel, in my world-view, that some of these, either or, or seemingly contrary conceptions of the truthfulness of claims of knowledge, do not always occur on the same playing field; We are not only our minds logical assumptions.

One of the seminal moments of my life was an experience seemingly outside my rational thought processes. My view on the dimensions of perception we are privy to in a moment, was altered. The apriori like truth I encountered reversed my impressions of what my senses were “telling” me as my mind interpreted my experience. This atypical or exceptional means of “knowing”, although seemingly not reproducible or otherwise verifiable, opened my sense of reality into a new perception. I now leave open the possibility for unknown doors opened into other dimensions as a way of comprehension.

Not unlike considering, if you hallucinated, were chemically or otherwise induced into altered perception, or realized something in a dream that provided deep insight into what reality is, or from there solved a problem. How objective or constructive was that “knowing”? Could it be some of both, with ontological overtones evidently as well? Would you then dismiss it if science told you it was a chemical occurrence and not what it seemed to be to you? Why did it, (in my case with no known chemical component from the outside to induce such an experience), why did It and Its message occur to reverse my ability to know what I thought I knew?

A transcendental experience can challenge all pre-existing empirical information assumption. Both my experiential based beliefs at the time, and this new subjective insight seeming to be imposed upon me, were by nature subjective. The latter experience reversed all my heretofore operational “knowledge” (which was technically theory/belief as self evaluation) from my life, yet it superseded it for one most important reason; inclusion. Even the subjective has a key to comprehending a kind of greater self that extends to all selves and existence.

This extra-scientific insight carried a unique quality of Union. In an instant I became sure that my life’s subjective based evaluations were in error. I was given the experience of what is correct. I was completely humbled and awed by this process. I was also given an optimism for the human condition, as well as an awareness of the necessity to BE beyond mental reasoning and even much emotionalized “evidence”.

.
I add this information particularly so religious or otherwise spiritual people will get an idea that I am not challenging their feel for their sense of knowing, based only on any scientifically biased agenda, as that might be assumed. Being human is not all cut and dried. The human heart has “things to say” in ways the mind may not exactly comprehend.

Next Part Four; Truth and What Amount of Evidence is Enough?


Truth and What Amount of Evidence is Enough?

Part Four

img_2738

TRUTH’S RELATIVITY FACTOR ALLOWS ANYONE TO MAKE CLAIMS WITHOUT OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE

The subjective nature of perceived truths, allows almost anyone to claim truth and claim evidence “proving” it, (observe me here) without ever actually doing objective methodology. Enter the users and manipulators of the public, and the good looks of logical shell game sophistry, made even richer by confident attitude and style. Apparently, this kind of attitude pandering toward not having a broad, or liberal investigation of the facts and context they inhabit, seems to be very big business. Fortunes and fame are made in maintaining these us and them mindsets, along with damning the scientific method, while promoting a highly pseudo-scientific rationalization matrix.

This post of mine here is my opinion based on my theories of human behavior discovered in and from my life and from observing life. They are not, however, truly scientific, but point of view as intended. This is part of debate and consideration toward truthfulness in the human condition. I believe I have solid reason for my beliefs, yet any one of my points can be questioned. As I have alluded to earlier, absolute truth is highly problematic to the mind alone.

This is the context of this post; knowledge or understanding comes from a broad view more honestly than the narrow. The battle happening in politics and religion is over what truth is. That will depend on which road one takes; a road toward an objective oriented open view of the universe and ones life in it, or a narrow definition prescribed on select group formulas of interpretation.

I say this, for I have learned of the existential relativism that is popular in the contrapuntal debunking that conservatism, in particular, is famous for in its need to deflect any, and perhaps all, questions from gaining a thoughtful toehold. It seems that once any conservatives seem to engage in accepting a liberalism supported proposal, the correctors descend upon them enmasse. Those evangelicals who have begun asserting the need to protect God’s earth, were chastised by other conservatives for falling into a liberalism trap. What fear as a guide will do.

Conservative leaders are seemingly busy about the business of inoculating their followers against any objective information that seems to damage their theories. Of course, from the conservative perspective, their beliefs are not theories but “Truth”. It is the rest of us who seem lost in a smorgasbord of disparate or devious thoughts. Products of liberalism’s uncertainties; with its mistakes and failed experimentation’s stand as proof of its falsity. Conservatism attempts to poison attempts at a real objective inquiry, for both their inherent insecurities and the need to not truly examining their own actions and responsibilities to the Whole of Life.

And finally to the real world thought that brought this would be book post to my mind tonight.

The Truth blog I am alluding to in this piece, mentioned the ultimate truth of the Bush administration that liberals cannot accept; That Bush has protected us from further attacks. Indeed, this claim has been heard across many conservative platforms in these few weeks before and after the Obama Presidency.

Here I go again.

I know the USA had the Civil War and other conflicts that may be said to have caused harm to this nation directly. In World War Two histories, I remember hearing that some kind of incendiary balloons from the Japanese war effort made it to Oregon but did little or no damage. Clinton had that bomb go off in one of the World Trade Center buildings, and home-made terrorist have bombed a few places, a Federal building in Oklahoma being the worst, I believe.

That said; Only one president had 9-11-01. All other presidents, then, could be said to have prevented that as well. Why Not? OK. Those since airplanes.

Which president was decreasing the anti terrorism budget against the advice of the prior administration at the time? Which president seemingly ignored the warnings that they denied having had, (even of airplanes being suspect in a future attack), until it was proved they did have the information, and then that was dismissed as historical? Which president used exhibits of terror prevention that proved highly dubious, and some barely feasible as the proof of prevention? What were the real preventions then specifically?

Why do we not think, regardless of presidency, that all our defensive agencies are not doing something in regard to avoiding attacks on the US all the time? With these indictments; what is the proof and the context that Bush prevented attacks? The many actions his administration took, all defined under the rationalization umbrella of 9-11 changed everything, are thought by intelligence agencies as being the terrorist current prime recruiting program. The next presidents may now experience the repercussions of the thousands of new terror recruits created under Bush. You know who would be blamed if something happened tomorrow?

-The Perpetual Lure-

Conservatism’s appeal is many-fold; It provided a cover for opportunism being interpreted only as good. It breaks any mold of objectivity, allowing implied associations to appear as fact if mouthed by experts, and actual fact as dubious information. It will imply a defect to attempts at objectivity beyond the conservative paradigm. In the realm of existential relativism, it will use all critiques from the outside as belonging to the outside group, and hence a critique of its own intent, thus conservatism can allow the challenge to roll off. These techniques close in the conserved identity, and expunge questioning from the outside. With a conserved identity, the world becomes us and them, yet if “they” bring this up, they will be seen by the conservatives as divisive, instituting an us and them.

Human beings have needs. Life comes with a requirement for existence. It is the manipulation and use of Life’s needs which opportunism and exploitation can use to crack the individuals immersion in the Whole of Life. Life, once partitioned, is put on the individuals auction block, or butchers block. We now have a conflict of interest created by subjectivity. The subjective identity will demonize, or otherwise diminish the rights of contrary subjectives.

Competition then becomes the underlying philosophy of Life. From there, the Whole of Life seems in relative terms, as being untrue, or questionable from interpreted observation; Since we seem to die, and until then compete for resources, our lives are always threatened. This institutes the permanent power of fear and its influence upon the subjective viewpoint. Life is presumably then, hostile in appearance. The basic requirements of life come to define who will survive and how, as the material and social environments are consumed in the process. All of Life, or the inclusiveness of unconditional Love, come to seem as subjective ideas and ideals to a self defined by the outside threats to being.

When observing conservative dialectics, the Whole, or The Commons, seems nonexistent. It is all about my survival and keeping my place, my subjective point of view. Beyond the conserved identity, there is hardly an OUR Place. This breaking of common consciousness of being, allows individual ideas to seek to overcome other individual ideas in competition. Competition becomes the God, the actual God beyond abstract notions of Divinity.

.
Conservatism but exist behind a facade of knowing; one which refused outside support as questioning. This is the destiny of the error extrapolated outward as if Whole. The use of others energy to benefit oneself becomes a second nature, a reversion back to a childish state of selfishness in cosmology. The earth is being pushed to the brink of sustainability, by these unsustainable concepts of subjective freedom which allow human beings to ultimately be irresponsible and unaccountable to their actions. But those actions will have their own unavoidable reckoning.

The cancer philosophy of perpetual business expansion, which seems the stock markets staple for instance, expects China alone, to be using twice the paper the whole world uses today, in under 25 years! Goodbye to earths forest. And India is expected to have a larger population than China. What is the conservatives plan? Likely; deny it. Maybe markets will, fix it? A paradigm change is mandatory, yet denial and diversion of attention seems to rule.

We might note how, in blame the problem terms, many kinds of conservatism have arsenals of blame and accusations toward those whose own ideas run contrary to conservative platitude. Ill equipped people who determine they must steal to survive, for instance, are given all the blame, responsibility, and accountability for their choice of crime for surviving in an essentially conservative paradigm; a way of life that benefits those who act in certain ways and have certain standards, even if the Whole of Life will not support them. Much as cancer will not support a healthy body by its competition with it, even while it claims to rightfully belong to it.

In abstraction, conservatives often claim their beliefs, lets say in freedom to do business anyway they like, is a good thing, especially since no one is stopping anyone from being a “success”. The delusional part of that concept is; If we all were these successes, who would be cleaning my toilet or picking up the garbage on the streets? If we all were these millionaires consuming vast amounts of material and service beyond the common folks, the earth would be destroyed by a mathematical/environmental lack of sustainability. Opportunism is being disguised, as are its fatal consequences. Fantasy and platitudes of individualism’s success and reward are substituted for objectivity. Abstraction can often allow one to validate oneself and their point of view, while never acknowledging the whole context. As has been said; “The less I know, the better I sleep at night.”

I am reminded of a popular conservative bumper sticker still seen. It goes something like this: ‘Anger a Liberal. Work, be successful and happy.’ By pivoting perception away from all those troubling ramifications of our actions in the world, and how they relate to others, how much more pleasing to claim the messengers of accountability as being either the lazy disgruntled or malcontented individuals. Unhappy campers period. An inquiry into all those troubling subject matters then; part of a problem in identity and not of investigation! This superior attitude seems prevalent amongst many of the right wing religious proselytizers as well.

Ignorance, lack of information, avoidance of knowing objective detail; denial of their importance. To observe the right wing conservative movements of our times, is to see these blinded minds and hearts in stark detail. Then to see liberalism tagged with all the collateral damage of abuse and exploitation, becomes conservatism’s magical answer. Conservatives seem to profess a world view of constant victimization by others who should be punished. Yet they may fear some kind of retribution implied by liberalism, with its insistence on responsible freedom and accountability. Conservatism cannot abide questioning, while for liberalism, that is part of then open process, like it or not. And it should be noted; that some liberals do not like accountability and responsibility themselves. They too. should be better informed of the ramifications of their thoughts into action.

It is this ignorance of the Whole, and an unwillingness to hear all the perspectives of others, that appeals so well to cognitive dissonance and the rationalizations of subjectivity. Temptations most stealthy place is in its appearance as a reward for goodness.

The odds of the truth being with conservative positions is inherently doubtful. It is way more likely that they are rationalizing some form of hierarchy and servitude toward their goals. Using human need as a kind of torture (do this or else) mechanism to get people to do what they want, and hopefully, while those people doing feel they must to survive. This is the operational paradigm of last resort survival subjectivity. This can make the conservative paradigm appear to all the unquestioning flocks, as divinely instituted by God or in other ways by “The Truth.”

-Conclusion

The Renaissance and the battles for the rights of the individual were fought from the hard won intelligence needed to understand liberalism’s requirements for commonality of individual rights in a society. These are now historical problematic outworkings for the making of individual fiefdoms. Legions of willingly or not, exploited, or otherwise used dependents, are a basic requirement for those who require “status” above the common, or the worshiping of a subjective fear and insecurity based imperative for less significance of the “other”.

These requirements for hierarchy require their own validations, including convolutions of subjective identity that place the self above others as a philosophical or cosmological “truth”. Separation, alienation and their dysfunction require explanations to appear logical, as if instituted by Life itself. We may note how many conservatives explain their absolute right to be both always correct and unquestioned philosophically.

.
Freedom for all, and liberty for all, which many fought for throughput the ages after overthrowing the strangleholds of some form of conservatism, are always under attack by new breeds and brands of hierarchical mindset, including totalitarian egocentric ones such as communism’s. These have learned to use the assumed language of God and of Liberty.

The corporation is ascending to rights over the individual, as is the rest of exploitative machinery in the modern world. Predatory consciousness has figured out how to compromise liberalism’s historical empowering of all legacy, while claiming to defend those very concepts. We may well be witnessing, not only the end of responsible individual freedom, but the ascendancy of unaccountable corporate freedom to exploitation. It is noted tat the corporate concept of accountability and responsibility to the wold is the same as that of a psychopath. Those temptations to self validation outside of other influences considered is a powerful seduction to dysfunctionally induced comfort these will come as they will to psychopathic thought; With all “good” validation. Unquestioned as if truth itself.

The individual must open their own eyes, their minds and their hearts, to see the Whole of Life, or Civilization may fall to cancers success. There is a presumed imperative given by extending ones own view of life toward the inclusion of all views; Many perspectives are required for an accurate view from and for, both mind and heart.

Conservatism’s truncated facade perspective appears correct to the conservatives dimmed down view on human dimensionality. This is the problem of perception that the world, and human beings will continue to wrestle with until fear and opportunism are seen for what they are, and not as unquestioned guides to action. Until then, we must try to save the earth and our own consciousness from our own unbridled imaginations.

Life and Love are in our hands, or will fall through them.

I can claim to know it all. Everything in black and white, or us and them. But what then am I likely to miss by not being open to Life as it moves now?

img_1894_2

All the spectrum’s make up Light. Light is One, yet differentiations are many.


img_1894

Other thoughts on the change in modern day conservatism;

Here is a review link to John Deans Book; Conservatives Without Conscience

John Dean is said to be a Barry Goldwater Conservative


http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=147

On Bloggers News Network, David K Johnstons book review; “Free Lunch”

How the rich trick the rest of us.
http://www.bloggernews.net/112877

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s