Posted on | May 27, 2010 | 35 Comments
Inspired by this photo and post over at iOwnTheWorld,
allow me to share a thought.
No, I’m not about to scuttle principles, espouse Brooksian centrism or go totally Charles Johnson on you.
Rather, consider that there are a number of people who sort of know that they’ve been duped by the Left, but haven’t personally been burned yet and thus may see the costs of admitting they’ve backed a false leader as too high.
Don’t make that cost high for them.
It’s quite easy and honest to make the case that the current global economic toilet bowl in which we’re swirling isn’t new.
By refusing to get into an ‘us vs. them’ analysis, and instead keeping a dispassionate, impersonal, historical view, I’ve had plenty of civil political discussions with Obama voters.
Now, I haven’t gone for the ‘big win’, either. None of them have admitted that, “Yeah, we kind of tubed it there.”
But focusing on who quarterbacked which team, at the expense of considering principles, is exactly the kind personality-driven distraction that helped enable the current mess.
So, as the bills come due, slogans like “State’s Rights” may indeed be undesirable. I do submit that the State as a political entity needs to be revitalized. The value of the State as a blast shield against Federal over-reach cannot be pointed out too many times.
States also, moreso from a Conservative than Libertarian vantage, have a valuable place in discussion with the Left. While a Libertarian of any caliber is forced to clash with the Leftist on purely theoretical grounds, the Conservative can limit the scope of Libertarian-style arguments to Federal discussion.
Want Socialism, Lefty? Have fun with that in your State, just don’t leave any Marx on me. Unlike a Libertarian, I can argue strongly the existing legal and historical case for the Federal Constitution, and leave teaching the Economics to the market. Let me restate that: I don’t find it contradictory at all to favor Libertarian arguments at the Federal level, and something else within a State. The State of Virginia defines marriage the way reasonable people do; I was happy to vote for that. I’m not a proponent of a Federal Amendment along those lines, because figuring out what private individuals are up to ought not to be a Federal tasks. We SoCons should lay by our dish on that point.
Back to my hypothetical Lefty here, this kind of simple, positive approach means that I’m really not attacking Leftist thought at all.
Sadly, there is more at stake that theory. It gets down tot the Benjamins.
The discussion, however it unfolds, is going to involve massive sacrifice.
If the Lefty end of your conversation is 50+, you’re going to have to assure them that, whatever the Economic rehab plan is, they’re not coming up empty.
No, Generation X is going to have to be willing to throw itself under the bus ahead of the Boomers in the name of saving future generations.
When you forgive outright and double down with the refusal to be vindictive, even if it means paying for Social Security, knowing that you’re buying so much air, the Lefty can be helped through depression, into acceptance of the fact that the Progressive Era has been nothing but the most expensive failure in human history.
Having said all that, it’s true that the scope of these words doesn’t extend beyond me and the half-dozen or so Lefties with whom I deal.
Plenty of others may see the Left as a sort of Georgia, and themselves a Sherman.
However emotionally satisfying that imagery may be, that’s not the healing route.
And, no, there are plenty on the Left that lack the kind on introspection necessary for this: “They’s some men you just cain’t reach,” from Cool Hand Luke.
I get that. However, this mellow, reflective approach is still the preferred going-in position.