Counterculture Con HQ

December 4, 2009

Lawgirl’s Kung Fu is Strong!

Filed under: Uncategorized — Jesusland @ 03:41

She says:

Sorry, dude. There’s more to my point than feeling good and avoiding greens. Although I can certainly understand the appeal of drawing such a simplistic analogy.

My point, at least in part, is that the type of dichotomy that the Conservative v. Progressive is part of the problem that Conservatives are facing. Most of life — politics and religion included — doesn’t fall into either one bucket or another. A political movement which only supports black and white choices doesn’t mesh with Post-Modern thought.

And, you completely missed my point about the comfort zone that Conservatism embraces. Conserving is only interesting, attractive, supportable when you you are comfortable with or benefitting from that which is being conserved. I’m not persuaded that disinterest in Conservatism is about personal greed or selfishness. In fact, conservatism and maintaining the status quo seems to me to be more selfish because it limits change and greater access / involvement.

If Conservatism wants to be successful, it needs to find ways to make its philosophies and perspectives more attractive to those who have been left out of the status quo. Part of that may be to tecognize problems in the status quo like not everybody is on that bus or is served equally thereby.

Here’s the deal, Lawgirl, what we call the “status quo” is not something that is static in time or set in stone.  It changes, and, dare I say it, is relative.  That’s why your “post-modern thought” can be considered the new status quo.  And it’s not conservatives defending it, it’s Leftwing Progressives through their lock on the media, entertainment, and academia (see that article I link).  That is the new “Establishment.”  That is the new dragon to be slain.  And you, Lawgrl, as a good progressive, are an agent of the new status quo/the new Establishment!  Perhaps you should change your nick to Agent Smith!  An agent in service of “the Man”!  While we old fashioned, dinosaur types are the slick leather-clad kung fu dragon slayers.  LOL.  We are now the “New”, and your Post-Modern Thought of the “everything is just a construct” the new “OLD.”  For there is nothing new about your 1930s style economic theories, nor your failed solutions for the inner cities, and other social experiments which have resulted in all sorts of plagues on society.   Progressive solutions today are now just retreads of the last 70 years, and even Europe is starting to drift away from them.  And we will use the strategies of the 60s and 70s counterculturalists on this “new Establishment” as effectively as they did on us.  Our kung fu is strong.  And we will have fun doing it because being the underdog is just a heckuva a lot more fun!  Ok, maybe some false bravado there.

I don’t believe being a conservative requires you to be either “black or white” in your thinking, as you put it.  After all, Ronald Reagan created a “big tent” to accommodate divergent philosophies under a conservative rubrick.  It was a coalition, with everything that implies.  True, perhaps there are fewer factions on the Right than on the Left, but we are just as tolerant/intolerant of ours as you are of yours.   Yes, sometimes we have our civil wars, but so do you.  Just look at poor Obama right now, can’t even get his own filibuster-proof Dems to vote for his healthcare.  LOL.  That is a civil war!  And it could tank his presidency.

I didn’t mean to miss your point about “comfort zones” though.  Sometimes I carelessly dismiss what sounds like a cliché or mere characterization.  I let such things slide and move onto what I thought was the gist of your comment.  That’s what “comfort zone” sounded like to me.  But given that you’ve come back to it I was wrong to dismiss it because there is grist for the mill there.  A “comfort zone”, like your “status quo” is also completely relative.  Your upper Westside Manhattanite has her own “comfort zones.”  She feels that she is being daring and courageous in her progressiveness, but that is nothing but what is comfortable and tittilating to her.  She is not courageous and daring, for I can assure you the likes of a Maureen Dowd (for example) does not know a single evangelical (for example) that she can call a friend, because that is outside of her “comfort zone.”  In fact I’m willing to bet your average evangelical knows more about how Maureen Dowd thinks than she knows how they do.  After all, they are daily and constantly bombarded by her message, while the same is not true for her.  She, like most progressives, lives in a bubble that most evangelicals do not simply because of who dominates the media, entertainment, and academia.  Who is the more comfortable now?  I put it to you that progressives are.  And I put it to you that evangelicals are more of the “other” to Maureen Dowd than she is to them.  SHE, the progressive, is the comfortable one.  And she is not daring nor courageous, as you seem to imply, merely for being a progressive.

Again, always a pleasure, Lawgirl.  You are putting me through my paces, and I always gain a few IQ points sparring with you because your kung fu is strong.  But mine is stronger.


  1. Thanks for the charming kudos. Of course, since this is your blog, you are entitled to feel that your kung fu is stronger. We’ll have to agree to disagree on that.

    I think that I missed the link for the article that you were referencing. And, having missed that link, I believe that I may be missing some, if not all, of your point.

    Repost the link, or point me to it, and I’ll respond directly to your post.

    Comment by LawGirl — December 4, 2009 @ 12:57

  2. Lawgirl,

    it’s the article linked in the How conservatives lost America post. Let me have it! But play nice.

    Comment by Jesusland — December 4, 2009 @ 13:25

  3. Oh, come on now, JL, I ALWAYS play nice.

    But, having read the article linked to your other post, I’m still behind the curve on your response.

    Yes, yes, the status quo isn’t actually static. By “status quo” I was referring to the general rubric of the Conservatives to which I have been exposed. Predominantly, they are white, male, Republicans who don’t realize that for many Americans life is more like “The Cosby Show” and less like “Leave It to Beaver.”

    After that statement, I had a hard time reading through your droning generalizations to get to your point. Status quo is relative, but, of course, I was speaking of that which is the focus of Conservative desires.

    Post-modern thought is not a tool of Progressivism; it’s a function of the change in the times, just as the change from the Dark Ages to the Renaissance to modern thought was. I’m still working on where I fall personally in that arena but nothing, nothing, that I believe in that regard could ever be classified as “everything is just a construct.” I thought that we were working on avoiding generalities??

    I’d like to hear more on the rest of your post because, frankly, I don’t get it. I think that it was some kind of tirade on and / or analogy about Maureen Dowd. I am so far from having Maureen Dowd speak for me, I had to Google her to figure out who she is.

    Comment by LawGirl — December 4, 2009 @ 00:13

  4. O noes! It’s the White Male Republicans™!!! [runs around screaming]

    Just kidding. Actually, I’m fine with the white folks, even the males. After all, I grew up in the Presbyterian Church, which as we all know is white as the driven snow (presumably because they’re racist). But I hear the GOP is accepting women now. I can put in a good word for you, Lawgirl, if you ever decide to apply!

    On a more serious note, as a progressive, what we call Post-Modern is all yours, Lawgirl. Own it. After all, this humble blogger wasn’t the one who raised the issue of Post-modern as evidence that a conservative worldview was inadequate to the times. As I recall, you did. And if Post-modern isn’t a “tool” of Progressivism, as you claim, then it certainly is a product of progressivism. It comes from your intelligentsia, taught and promoted in your academia and entertainment, the values of which are more often than not at odds with the population at large. It didn’t just descend upon us uninvited from the ether. And how convenient for the Progressive intelligentsia to promote Post-Modern and then tut tut conservatism as inadequate to “the times.” Just slightly too convenient, wouldn’t you agree?

    And if, as you say, you’re not entirely comfortable with Post-Modern (to your credit), then perhaps it’s time to start reevaluating your loyalties (I believe a mostly emotional loyalty to the tag “Liberal”). Like it or not, as a good progressive, the likes of Maureen Dowd do indeed speak for you. And if not, again—maybe it’s time to start reevaluating your loyalties.

    Comment by Jesusland — December 4, 2009 @ 11:07

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: