The Language Of Irrationalism

Lately, I've been trying to gain some sort of understanding of just what it is that drives those of the right-wing stripe. It seems as though there are two mutually unintelligible political languages being spoken in this nation, as though there is an unbridgeable chasm between the far right and the rest of us.

Certainly, there are aspects of modern conservatism of which I have at least some comprehension: The affluent being in favor of policies that further enrich them is easily understandable; The pro-life movement I have some sympathy for, though I feel that they are being led down the primrose path by the G.O.P.; Right-wing racism, nativism, xenophobia and homophobia, though I find them to be reprehensible, are readily grasped.

But just what is it that drives an otherwise normal working-class person to act consistently against his or her own self-interest (and, as it turns out, the interests of the nation as a whole)?

This quest led, in the past week, to a rather interesting exchange with a conservative co-worker, the impetus being a bumper-sticker that read, "Obama: Keep the change. I'll keep my guns, my money and my freedom." It led me to muse aloud why so many people, despite the Administration's policy proposals, were so eager to believe the Republican Party's implication that Barack Obama wants to, in essence, disarm them, take their hard-earned money and give it to a bunch of shiftless Negroes.

My co-worker's ever-so-eloquent reply? "Because we're not liberal commies." I laughed, then ironically thanked him for being so helpful. His rejoinder: "It may be blunt, but it's true."

At this point, I realized that he was not attempting to amuse, in the manner that I might when jokingly calling him a fascist. Instead, he was dead serious; his mindless, and ultimately meaningless, iteration of hate-radio talking points was, in his own mind, a decisive bon mot.

I proceeded to ask him numerous questions about his beliefs. He refused to answer questions about actual public policy, instead preferring to engage in ad hominem attacks against the President; he repeatedly regurgitated the right-wing talking point concerning Obama's use of a teleprompter. Apparently not realizing that Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton and Bush 43 had also extensively used such devices, he was only too ready to embrace the notion that a black man, as he put it, "can't speak well without his teleprompter."

In addition, he blamed the President for numerous perceived misdeeds that had, in fact, been perpetrated by others (or that were simply the product of the right-wing imagination). It became increasingly clear that he had no affirmative beliefs. His focus was only upon what he hated; Barack Obama was symbolic for him, a convenient focal point for his copious and otherwise-incoherent rage. He had been fed by the likes of Rush and Sean and Billo, for the entirety of his life, a simple explanation for every problem that he faced, for every injustice that he discerned in the world: blame the evil libruls.

It saddened me that this was all there was to it, that there was not some greater, overarching philosophical basis for my co-worker's beliefs. But, in the end, that is what conservatism is: an appeal to our baser instincts, to the lesser angels of our natures, to anger, to hatred, to irrationalism.

And that is the chasm that separates us, in our nation and in the world: The thoughtful versus the superstitious, the modern versus the medieval, the rational versus the irrational.

And God help humanity if my side loses this battle.

Why So Angry?

I get the feeling that I may be the only person in the U.S. that is not freaking out about the AIG bonuses, considering the near-universal pseudo-populist outcry currently facing our friends in the credit default swap market. But that may be because I've actually been paying attention for the last thirty years.

This Wall Street attitude of entitlement is unsurprisingly pro forma. It is nothing new; it is part and parcel of the "Greed Is Good," "the market is God" mentality that has dominated conservative economic "thought" since the Reagan Era. The basic premise of that ideology is that the market's "invisible hand" will always lead individual actors in the direction of the collective good, and that government can serve only as an impediment to the betterment of mankind.

And now, as during the Great Depression, that economic religiosity has been shown to be utterly lacking.

That doesn't stop Republicans from claiming be appalled by the greed of AIG. But let me say this loud and clear: THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME BEHAVIOR THAT YOU HAVE BEEN LAUDING FOR THE PAST 28 YEARS! This is its logical consequence, and if you are incapable of recognizing that reality, you have absolutely no place in the current public-policy debate. You are part of the problem, so stop pretending that your empty talking points are solutions.

It is time for conservatives to repent their sins or face political exile. There can be no in-between.

I Guess I Hate America

Today I had the chance to watch "Erin Brockovich" on one of our movie channels, for the first time in a few years. This is one of those films that (as the right-wingers tell us) shows that Hollywood hates America. I enjoyed it immensely.

If you don't recall, the film recounts the title character's participation in a lawsuit involving the pollution of groundwater with hexavalent chromium by the energy company, Pacific Gas & Electric. It resulted in a tort settlement of over $300 million.

Now, I've heard many conservatives whine that hating corporations equals hating America, and movies like "Erin Brockovich" hate corporations. Thus, they are anti-American.

But why is it that disliking a corporation that breaks the law makes a person "anti-corporation," any more than disliking a person who breaks the law makes one a misanthrope? And why is it that the Right thinks that individuals are so much less important than corporations, as though we all have no purpose other than to serve as cogs in the industrial wheel?

Of course, what it really comes down to is a right-wing love affair with power. They kowtow to it, they worship it... and they believe that we all should merely hope to live off the table scraps that the powerful deign to give us. And if we all die from chromium poisoning, we should be grateful.

Me? I have nothing against corporations, but I feel that following the law is as incumbent upon them as it is upon me or you.

The difference between me and the Right, in the end, is that they are happy to be lap dogs, while I continue to be an independent human being.

Been A Long Time Since I Rock 'N' Rolled

Last month I was lucky enough to get onstage for a reunion gig of the old band, Julio Goldstein -- the first time I'd performed musically in almost a year. Finally got photos of the evening in question: Massive crowd, drunken bar owner, many old fans; it was great fun. Makes me very glad that Jim and I are putting together a new band for the new year.

Rock on, my friends!