Conservatives and Ermine Robes

1.09.2006
Ore : 8:32 AM

In the mid-90s, they were dittoheads saluting the Gingrich revolution. In the 80s, they loved Reagan. In the 70s, Tricky Dick. They voted against civil rights, and for Herbert Hoover -- and in between, these people, with frothing steins in hand, denounced FDR at local Bund meetings. In the 19th century, they couldn't write enough excuses for social injustice and exploitative, unrestrained capitalism; in the 18th, for King George III.

If the Tories were around today, they would (probably in some small part due to severe senile dementia) be reading and writing for Human Events Online, and filling internships at the American Enterprise Institute, or the Heritage Foundation.

Like scary little sunflowers, they are in a sense heliotropic. Who arrogates, expresses, and wields the most power? Who exhibits the greatest self-satisfaction, and the least humility and empathy? That's who they'll turn to, worshipful. That's who they'll excuse. That's who they will want to rule them. And they will shrug off any excess, so long as it's pulled with the proper attitude, with enough elan.

Discursively, I doubt many of them labor under the illusion that they will get to share in the power as wages for their trouble. This is why they are so impossible to combat: they are true believers.

When George Bush announces l'etat, c'est moi, they plaster billboards with brobdignagian blow-ups of his face, accompanied by some cryptofascist caption such as "Our Leader," or an equally enormous "W".

It's obvious we've come to a point where anything will be excused. Dick Cheney could eat a human infant raw on C-SPAN, and somewhere, someone (possibly Mark Steyn or Michelle Malkin) would write a huffy apologia. Someone somewhere else (Wolf Blitzer, perhaps) would call Howard Dean to the carpet, asking what his party is going to do about cannibalistic Democrats.

Friedmanism, robber baronism, objectivism, modern Republicanism, conservatarianism, libertarianism (as it tends to be practiced), corporatism, propertarianism, dominionism -- whatever you want to call them -- are nothing more than royalism in new drag. These are not philosophies so much as after-the-fact rationalizations for bad behavior among society's most powerful by their supporters.

It shouldn't seem too counterintuitive that redcoats can also come in natty doublebreasted suits.

posted by teh l4m3 at 8:32 AM | Permalink |

[ back home ]

Comments for Conservatives and Ermine Robes
And yet, everyone else is on "the wrong side of history."

Yes. Somehow that phrase always finds a way to make it out of David Books's/Ann Coulter's/Alan Keyes's mouth.

...royalism in new drag

BINGO! The nobles have changed their appearance more than Madonna.

Storm the Bastille!

Dare I suggest that modern monarchies (or constitutional monarchies, such as the country I live in) are more stable and democratic than republics? Don't forget that the idea of a constitutional monarchy / federal system of government was tossed around for Iraq...

Elmo: viva la revolucion!

madamerouge: "Dare I suggest that modern monarchies (or constitutional monarchies, such as the country I live in) are more stable and democratic than republics?"

Not on this blog, mister!

Seriously, you may be on to something in that such a system recognizes that predilection for royalism in people and effectively co-ops it, contains it, and neuters it.

But I still suffer from my native allergy to monarchism, and must therefore give you a hearty "NON!!!"[/fatrobot]

I thought we already had royalty in America? How else would you describe the Hilton sisters, Tom Cruise, and The Bush Dynasty (soon to be continued by Jeb Bush for Preznit and then Jenna Bush like totally for Preznit).

lqykf: marlboro man lube.

I love Fatrobot's "non!"

I love your "native allergy to monarchism." I'm going to aggravate it further: Sweden, Denmark, UK, Japan, The Netherlands...

Chuckles: you do already have royalty in America. Aside from the public personalities you point out, you've got Dubya. He's your king until 2008. May I quote some Don Henley?

They’re beating plowshares into swords
For this tired old man that we elected king


Don wrote The End of the Innocence in 1987 about King Ronald.

I know, I know. Oh, well, there's always the guillotine...

[note to NSA guys: KIDDING!! Ha ha.]

bakys: the tool they'll use to tear out my fingernails once I get renditioned to Uzbekistan.

yeah, Skull and Bones vs. Skull and Bones in '04 wasn't exactly motivating.

ahh AEI, the source of all hackery.

my ex-roomie went to intern at ALEC(a direct action subsidiary of AEI) and was slightly disturbed to find that a lot of his fellow interns actually believed the bullshit that they came up with, from things like private prisons to global warming to the various physical and metaphysical wars being waged

nxyhyboo: what W said when his bottle of SoCo ran out

"Chuckles: you do already have royalty in America. Aside from the public personalities you point out, you've got Dubya. He's your king until 2008. May I quote some Don Henley?"

madamerouge: I guess you misunderestimated me when I wrote: The Bush Dynasty. I guess I should have said Teh Bush Dynasty.

ai: It always frightens me when I meet people that are smart, funny, motivated and working for people like Tom DeLay. Those people freak me out. How could anyone with a few brain cells to rub together(or drown in booze) buy his crap? I don't know. The best is the disenfranchised that have managed to reinfranchise(or should I say franchise?) themselves throught the help of Clinton supported/Bush destroyed college grants and are working for the enemy. Those people crack me up. In teh bad way.

gpaqvcg: The new government college loan program, where loan availability is based on previous family member's loan qualification.

Chuckles, colour my face rouge. I got so excited after reading "the Hilton sisters" that I started immediately composing a reply in my head. Sorry a-boot that.

ai: So was your roomie, like, one of those Straussians who put on a good Christianist, democracy-lurvin' front, who in reality thought it was just so much opium-for-the-masses hooey? Or was he just making a buck where he could?

vtcoqjb: Vermont-style coq-au-whiskey.

the straussian one. he is from a mormon background, so some of that influence kind of shows.

when we lived together we only agreed on non-interventionist foreign policy and environmental conservation. he's slightly(by which i mean of course very) anti-government and doesn't seem to understand, despite copious evidence to the contrary that welfare queens are as abundant as elves and dwarves, or that medical malpractice is really overblown(just because his dad got sideswiped in a lawsuit) or that universal healthcare is a good idea.

i am told by his ex, now a good friend of mine that he also used to babble on about eugenics every now and then.

but he went to an all boys, more-expensive-than-college old money conservative high school in the 1990's when everyone was getting high off of newt and co's kool-aid, so there's no curing him.

oh, the memories!

(gets all misty eyed)

wgrmu: worldwide gremlin union

© 2006 Freedom Camp | Blogger Templates by layoutstudios.com and Gecko & Fly.
No part of the content or the blog may be reproduced without prior written permission.
Learn how to Make Money Online at GeckoandFly


Web This Blog
My Photo
Name:
Location: Camp X-Ray, Gitmo, Cuba

I know why the caged bird gets beaten.


Bulls, Bitches & Screws