A not insubstantial portion of our population (mostly male, mostly white) is horribly unsatisfied with the state of affairs--or what they perceive to be the state of affairs, anyway.
IOW the increased success and power of those portions of the populace that are not male or white--although (it appears) that the maleness is the more importa…
A not insubstantial portion of our population (mostly male, mostly white) is horribly unsatisfied with the state of affairs--or what they perceive to be the state of affairs, anyway.
IOW the increased success and power of those portions of the populace that are not male or white--although (it appears) that the maleness is the more important part of the equation, by probably a small margin. The is a certain solidarity in maleness that can outweigh differences in ethnicity.
And this is one of the central components of our current problems.
The more equitable treatment of women and minorities is almost anathema to these people. As is the disrespect to their maleness that is represented in the gay and trans communities. Because reality/life is seen as a zero-sum game, rather than what it is (which is a non-zero-sum cooperative venture).
Because they have been on top for so long, any erosion of that status/position is perceived as an attack, rather than something that might have some justification.
All of the rather toxic maleness that is on display in the GoP/MAGA highlights this... as does the inordinate concern with women having too many rights and to much control over themselves (because control is a male prerogative, indeed, a right hallowed by tradition, law, and long practice).
This people are naturally labeled conservative, because they ARE social conservatives. Defenders (and now reactionaries because they have lost important battles) of the status quo. They just aren't philosophical/establishment conservatives.
These people are steeped in traditional cultural narratives and definitions of maleness that extend beyond biology. That are culturally generated and fixed, not matters of necessary fact. They are particularly enmeshed in the American narratives of self-reliance/liberty (for males and whites, anyway) and the Frontier (even though the Frontier closed in 1906, officially). Hence the obsession with guns (instruments of individual power) as well--despite how much has changed over time.
Many of them are angry that (for some reason) women do not want them--which means (in their minds, anyway) women should be forced to want them... because that is the natural order of things. Any woman that doesn't want them must be obviously flawed somehow. The problem is not in them, Horatio, but in the women (my apologies to Shakespeare).
Looking at the gender gaps in electoral support for the Democrats vs. GoP again makes this pretty clear. The GoP, despite a few token people of color or female gender is the party of white males. This is not an accident, not a statistical anomaly--and the persistence of it (in the face of data and science, and economic history) again highlights the essentially cultural nature of the thing, rather than a concern with what are generally called "kitchen table" issues that pundits and analysts feel are so determinant--but that aren't really (except for the plutocratic class).
Politics IS culture made manifest.. and the cultural aspect has, historically, been more powerful than the so-called objective aspects. The culture war is THE war, currently played out in the realm of politics rather than on the battlefield (at least for now)... and too many people ignore or denigrate this aspect of politics, preferring to pretend that other aspects are more controlling, rather than being excuses or justifications for supporting your side of the culture war.
Disclaimer: I am a 63 year old white male and *I* can see this after being raised in a time and place that was far more sexist and racist than American society was for the last few decades--maybe that is WHY I can see it.
R Mercer - you’ve said a lot I agree with. But one group of MAGA guys is the frat boy/Barstool sports set. They aren’t really social conservatives in that alcohol, drugs, porn, and sexual adventuring are celebrated and key to the culture. In a variety of way not conservative at all - risk takers, profligate spenders and ostentatious if they have the wherewithal
The social conservatism is in the treatment of women and those Other People.
Don't confuse adherence to Xtian sexual and social mores (which a lot of people historically paid lip service to and actually ignored, unless applying it to others) to the core of conservatism (how women are treated and who the Other is and how they are treated).
Christianity got turned into a justification for enslaving blacks, after all.
I think for some today that Christian is a label (as is conservative) largely stripped of its original meaning. Just as conservative doesn't define an agreed-upon set of principles anymore, Christian has little clear to denote. Somewhere in there, there's this guy from 2000 years ago but even who he was is up for grabs.
I generally don't yak about it but since we're discussing, I say I follow Jesus cuz I don't like the image most people lay on me if I say I'm a Christian. There are so many kinds of Christians but a very specific kind have kinda stolen the descriptor for themselves rather than using the lessons passed on from Jesus... who never enslaved anybody, but did mention loving your neighbor
Conservative does define an agreed upon set of principles, within the context of the society culture that is in play.
IOW, American conservatism has core principles. British conservatism has core principles, same with French... or Chinese, or Islamic.
These core principles aren't usually about economics or the specifics of government policy. Though economics comes into play.
American Establishment Conservatism (which ran from the 60s until Reagan) was supposedly about things like small government, low taxes, free markets.... but that was a facade put on traditional American conservatism--which was about nativism, racism, and male superiority. WF Buckley and a few others worked hard to shed that image--but that only lasted until the 90s.
The key to understanding conservatism and its principles/values is that it is primarily about maintaining privilege and the status quo, the existing power and economic structures.
A not insubstantial portion of our population (mostly male, mostly white) is horribly unsatisfied with the state of affairs--or what they perceive to be the state of affairs, anyway.
IOW the increased success and power of those portions of the populace that are not male or white--although (it appears) that the maleness is the more important part of the equation, by probably a small margin. The is a certain solidarity in maleness that can outweigh differences in ethnicity.
And this is one of the central components of our current problems.
The more equitable treatment of women and minorities is almost anathema to these people. As is the disrespect to their maleness that is represented in the gay and trans communities. Because reality/life is seen as a zero-sum game, rather than what it is (which is a non-zero-sum cooperative venture).
Because they have been on top for so long, any erosion of that status/position is perceived as an attack, rather than something that might have some justification.
All of the rather toxic maleness that is on display in the GoP/MAGA highlights this... as does the inordinate concern with women having too many rights and to much control over themselves (because control is a male prerogative, indeed, a right hallowed by tradition, law, and long practice).
This people are naturally labeled conservative, because they ARE social conservatives. Defenders (and now reactionaries because they have lost important battles) of the status quo. They just aren't philosophical/establishment conservatives.
These people are steeped in traditional cultural narratives and definitions of maleness that extend beyond biology. That are culturally generated and fixed, not matters of necessary fact. They are particularly enmeshed in the American narratives of self-reliance/liberty (for males and whites, anyway) and the Frontier (even though the Frontier closed in 1906, officially). Hence the obsession with guns (instruments of individual power) as well--despite how much has changed over time.
Many of them are angry that (for some reason) women do not want them--which means (in their minds, anyway) women should be forced to want them... because that is the natural order of things. Any woman that doesn't want them must be obviously flawed somehow. The problem is not in them, Horatio, but in the women (my apologies to Shakespeare).
Looking at the gender gaps in electoral support for the Democrats vs. GoP again makes this pretty clear. The GoP, despite a few token people of color or female gender is the party of white males. This is not an accident, not a statistical anomaly--and the persistence of it (in the face of data and science, and economic history) again highlights the essentially cultural nature of the thing, rather than a concern with what are generally called "kitchen table" issues that pundits and analysts feel are so determinant--but that aren't really (except for the plutocratic class).
Politics IS culture made manifest.. and the cultural aspect has, historically, been more powerful than the so-called objective aspects. The culture war is THE war, currently played out in the realm of politics rather than on the battlefield (at least for now)... and too many people ignore or denigrate this aspect of politics, preferring to pretend that other aspects are more controlling, rather than being excuses or justifications for supporting your side of the culture war.
Disclaimer: I am a 63 year old white male and *I* can see this after being raised in a time and place that was far more sexist and racist than American society was for the last few decades--maybe that is WHY I can see it.
R Mercer - you’ve said a lot I agree with. But one group of MAGA guys is the frat boy/Barstool sports set. They aren’t really social conservatives in that alcohol, drugs, porn, and sexual adventuring are celebrated and key to the culture. In a variety of way not conservative at all - risk takers, profligate spenders and ostentatious if they have the wherewithal
The social conservatism is in the treatment of women and those Other People.
Don't confuse adherence to Xtian sexual and social mores (which a lot of people historically paid lip service to and actually ignored, unless applying it to others) to the core of conservatism (how women are treated and who the Other is and how they are treated).
Christianity got turned into a justification for enslaving blacks, after all.
I think for some today that Christian is a label (as is conservative) largely stripped of its original meaning. Just as conservative doesn't define an agreed-upon set of principles anymore, Christian has little clear to denote. Somewhere in there, there's this guy from 2000 years ago but even who he was is up for grabs.
I generally don't yak about it but since we're discussing, I say I follow Jesus cuz I don't like the image most people lay on me if I say I'm a Christian. There are so many kinds of Christians but a very specific kind have kinda stolen the descriptor for themselves rather than using the lessons passed on from Jesus... who never enslaved anybody, but did mention loving your neighbor
Conservative does define an agreed upon set of principles, within the context of the society culture that is in play.
IOW, American conservatism has core principles. British conservatism has core principles, same with French... or Chinese, or Islamic.
These core principles aren't usually about economics or the specifics of government policy. Though economics comes into play.
American Establishment Conservatism (which ran from the 60s until Reagan) was supposedly about things like small government, low taxes, free markets.... but that was a facade put on traditional American conservatism--which was about nativism, racism, and male superiority. WF Buckley and a few others worked hard to shed that image--but that only lasted until the 90s.
The key to understanding conservatism and its principles/values is that it is primarily about maintaining privilege and the status quo, the existing power and economic structures.