(This post only refers to conservatives who are a bit older than me, we're talking 35 years of age or older.)
You know, if you were to ask your typical Breitbart-Cruz-Levin fan to list their core beliefs, i have no doubt you'd end up with a shining document that contained the words "freedom, liberty, prosperity, freedom, capitalism, security, constitution, founders," and "freedom" a number of times. And they would look at their statement of purpose, and think "how can anyone have a problem with these beliefs of mine? They are utterly beyond reproach. Anyone who criticizes me and my sacred beliefs is just plain wrong."
But nobody has any problem with those collections of patriotic buzzwords. We really don't.
It's the little things, the things they say when goofing off with their buddies, the things that creep and crawl from between the lines that come across as icky.
It's how they hated the first black president before he was sworn in, how they immediately assumed that the dead black kid was guilty. It's their constant fear of "thugs" and "urban youths" with their "cRap music."
It's their offhand remarks that young women are turning into "sluts" and are "stupid" because they have been fooled by falling for flashy guys instead of grounded, sensible, conservative men of worth and valor. (Translation: "Women refuse to fuck me, what's their problem?")
It's the jibes and jabs at "metrosexuals" and "fairies" and "wimps" and all those others who don't live their lives in unconscious imitation of John Wayne. It's the bragging that they used to "stuff kids into lockers" and "put the nerds in headlocks."
It's the repetition of the phrase "...are laughing at us." How many times have you heard that? The illegals are laughing at us, the Muslims are laughing at us, other countries... are laughing at us!
Sometimes that seems to be their greatest fear. To be laughed at.
These conservatives -- the ones who are middle-aged now -- always remind me of kids that we all knew in junior high. Not the bullies -- the genuine brutal sharks who are probably all in jail now -- but the kids that tried to cozy up to the bully, the wannabe bullies, the kids who looked at the dweebs and fags and sissies and weirdos and said "i don't want to be laughed at, i want to be one of the tough guys. I want to make fun of the weak, and not be considered weak myself."
And ever thus have they lived their lives. And it worked, for a while.
But these days, they don't feel too cool. All of a sudden, they're being called "hicks" and "rednecks" and "teatards." The specky geeks they once thought they ruled are now ruling them. Now it's cool to be black, and okay to be gay, and perfectly acceptable to not give a fuck if whether the music you're listening to, or the movies you watch, or the people you hang out with, are acceptably masculine. Now their Republican party is no longer the dominant party of Reagan and Trump and Oliver North, but the uncool, stodgy, stuffy old white man's club of Boehner and McConnell.
As Grandpa Simpson sagely stated,"I used to be with it, but then they changed what it was. Now what I'm with isn't it, and what's it seems weird and scary to me."
And they don't like that. Around the age of 12, they made a deal with the Devil, that they'd sell their souls for the chance to be on top of the pecking order, to be the bully rather than the bullied. And now they feel bullied -- by young people, by attractive women, by the intelligentsia, by Hollywood, these voices assaulting their sense of self worth from all sides.
No wonder they find such solace in the right-wing world of talk radio and FOX News. It's the last place on the planet where they're still cool.
As for the conservatives and libertarians under the age of 35? Probably still going through that Ayn Rand phase.
Twitter.
Behance.
Facebook.
Pinterest.
Tumblr.
14 comments:
I suppose to you, its the opposite for liberals because they were on the "right side of history" as some of them love to say.
Opposite? See, you're still thinking that this is some kind of either-or thing. It's not, that's the point. What i'm saying is that when people are younger, they tend to divide people into good-bad, strong-weak, us-them categories. And they want to be with the "winning" side, and bully the "losing side" to make themselves feel like #winners.
I'm sure a lot of younger libtertarian types are not so stodgy. They will say, hey, if you're a guy, you can be a tough football-playing stud who fucks cheerleaders, or you can be a twink who likes fashion and Britney Spears, or anything at all. If you're a girl, you can be a cheerleader or some butch lesbian who fixes cars. Anything, whatever. It's a rainbow, man, a spectrum.
I can show you plenty of websites where, in addition to politics, conservatives like to heap hatred on anything that offends them culturally. One of my faves is this old geezer who has a death vendetta going on with Lady Gaga; even though she's very successful, and conservatives are supposed to not hate success, he wants to see her torn down from her pedastal and cast into the gutter. Furthermore, he can't really give a specific reason WHY, he can't list her offenses, he just senses, on a primal level, that somehow she represents something against his worldview.
That's the classic bully for ya.
First, I find Lady Gaga to be emblematic of everything wrong with the modern music industry, all flash, no substance. Hence why all my favorite bands are fringe indie groups you likely haven't heard of. (I can point you to them if you'd like).
Second, what I meant to say is that when you bring up the "Winning and losing side" that again falls into something I've been saying for a while, that when it comes to liberals and conservatives, it works both ways.
And third, perhaps that man's grievances with Lady Gaga is more on the lines that many modern entertainers these days tend to think they're more important then they really are. That somehow people should take their word seriously in spite of the fact they really aren't anything beyond a performer.
If the problem with modern conservatism stems from bigoted southern fundamentalists like Pat Robertson, then the problem with modern liberalism stems from the elites of Hollywood and the entertainment industry.
I love Lady Gaga. She has a terrific voice and writes some damn catchy songs.
See, i've heard people say that -- that performers ought to shut up because their opinion means nothing. NOTHING. They are ordinary people who happen to sing, not experts or scientists or politicians...
And yet, every day on conservative radio, i hear it repeated that that experts, scientists, and politicians know nothing, and that any ordinary person with God-given common sense can come to better conclusions than those ivory-tower Schmendricks.
So which is it?
Well, I'll give this to Lady Gaga, she at least doesn't come off as a raging douche like Bieber has turned out to be.
I have no problem when celebraties want to support causes and such, its when they pass themselves off like they somehow run the country based around what they say, and their legions of fans treat what they say as the gospel is when I have problems.
As for the last part, I would argue that perhaps people with common sense should be in charge, because I sure don't think the same applies with the current ruling establishment.
This is something I always hear from progressives, that conservatives and libertarians are anti-intellectual because we're still skeptical that man somehow is causing climate change. If anything I would argue progressives are exploiting science and politicizing it to advance their own agendas.
When people say things like that -- that "they pass themselves off like they somehow run the country." You're just getting overly offended, bringing your own prejudices to it.
When i'm watching sports, like football or MMA fighting, there are plenty of times when some overpaid athlete will bellow "yeah, baby! Number one in the whole universe, going all the way to the Superbowl, i am the greatest!"
...and i don't jump up and denounce this man, this arrogant man who believes himself superior to everyone else in the world. It's just talk. Flash. Pizzazz.
Oh, jeez, here we go on climate change.
It's an unbelievable bit of insanity, this belief amongst conservatives that the only reason liberals are worried about the climate is because of some sort of insidious conspiracy to destroy capitalism and make everyone live in sheds and eat cold oats.
That's bullshit.
Liberals want to be as spoiled and comfortable as everyone else. We want to fill our cars up with cheap gas and buy cheap food and take long vacations.... but we also recognize that reality isn't our own personal wonderland where all our greedy needs are the single standard of rightness.
The progressive stops stuffing his face with cake and burgers every once in a while and says, "jeez, this is making me fat. I should go eat some salad, drink some water, because even if it's not as tasty, it will be better."
The conservative continues to feast, screaming "nothing will stop the cake and burgers! More fries! You people saying that this will make me fat are just trying to bankrupt McDonalds because you're jealous of what i have! OM NOM NOM! Ask any scientist employed by McDonalds, they'll tell you that people just naturally go through fat and skinny periods, no matter what they consume! It's a cycle, and its impossible that my behavior can have any effect on my weight!"
(Had salad and garbanzo beans for breakfast.)
I suppose then the difference lies between how people react to their words. I certainly am not going to vote for whoever just because he or she supports them.
And you go on about how conservatives don't care about the environment or their personal health when Al Gore's own house uses more energy then the average citizen. And from the looks of it, he certainly could learn to cut back a bit. If the progressives really do care about what you said, maybe they'd attract more support by practicing what they preach
Look, I certainly get we should leave the Earth a little better then we leave it. I'd definitely not want to live in some smog-choked city like Beijing. But this whole suggestion that we're somehow responsible for affecting the climate, an massive and complex institution that has been in place before modern human civilization even came into place is something I remain skeptical towards. Not to mention the fact there remains plenty of evidence among the scientific community that this is a natural occurrence.
But of course, never let a good cause go to waste. Which is why progressives milk the climate change bandwagon for all its worth.
Ooh, busted.
I remember when i first started hating capitalism; the act of buying, selling, and trading just irked me to no end.
For a long time, i pondered, how do i destroy this system? I considered fomenting revolution, normalizing homosexuality, drugs in the drinking water, desecration of currency, the abortion of capitalist babies...
...and then it hit me. Climate change! That's how i'll get back at those lousy assholes who sell me stuff and pay me to work.
^____-
CAPTAIN PLANEEEEEEEEEEET
Also, using the existence of Al Gore to counter any environmental argument is lazy and weak.
From now on, i will respond to any conservative discussion on marriage and family values with the following...
"Rush Limbaugh is fat and has had four wives!"
Because Al Gore. He's fat. He's fat and Limbaugh is fat. They fart fatly. If there's a goofy fat guy allied with your political party, all your arguments are automatically defeated.
I reference Al Gore because he's the mouthpiece for the climate change crusade the same way Rush is the mouthpiece for the neocon movement. And progs, like conservatives, will never admit to the hypocrisy on their side.
The point is, again, the Earth is big, our impact on it is relatively miniscule aside from local, a river that got polluted because of a nearby factor, cities that are choked with smog. But on a worldwide scale that the progs insist that we are doing? Scientists haven't even reached a consensus yet.
Scientists NOT being paid by oil companies or Christian think-tanks have come to something of a consensus. Yes, the earht has 'cycles,' and we were heading into a 10,000 yead cooling trend, which suddenly began to reverse itself about 50 years ago.
Hmm, what if our global warming is offset by natural cooling, and things remain where they are? Kind of like that episode of Frisky Dingo where Killface solved the problem?
That'd be neat.
And I'm supposed to believe the scientists backing the climate change bandwagon have not themselves been bought off?
And technically, Xander was the one that fixed the problem. Killface just took all the credit.
By..... Soros?
Holy crap, mang, you know your Frisky Dingo. Props!
Post a Comment