Tuesday, September 13, 2022
The Great 21st Century Pole Shift
More and more we are reading establishment media pieces in publications like The Atlantic telling us of looming authoritarianism if Trump were to win an election again. The arguments border on the comical. For one thing, Trump already was president for four years, and in spite of constant leftist rambling about “authoritarianism,” there was nothing beyond what other presidents have done that can be remotely defined as “authoritarian.” He certainly didn’t send an armed FBI to ravage his opposition. The problem with Trump, for some, was that he’s simply conservative on major policy issues. It’s absolutely absurd that we’ve come to bow before the Jacobin alter so much that something as common sense as protecting our border has been defined as a debatable issue. Now it’s not even that. No one is permitted to even suggest that our border should be secure without being labled an extreme right wing “fascist.” A cabal of tech titans that now dominate public communication have decided that half of the political spectrum is literally no longer allowed to exist.
Amazingly, “conservative” and “liberal” are still recognizable perspectives. One can talk with a person for a few minutes on issues of the day and recognize where they stand in the conservative/liberal dichotomy. But…something strange has happened. While the divide decades ago bares similarity to the divide today, on many major policy issues there has literally been a pole shift.
Prior to the last couple of decades, the left clearly stood for “free speech.” “Liberals” were, in many ways, libertarian in outlook. They were extremely skeptical, if not openly hostile to government authority. They were certainly no champion of the FBI or CIA and it’s unlikely they would have blindly followed a command from on high to take an experimental vaccine. They were anti-war, anti-authority, and pro-“do your own thing.” Conservatives took a more paternalistic approach to public policy, in some cases guiding their worldview by traditional religious values — a trait that still exists among many in the Republican Party.
As noted before, the poles in this dichotomy are still recognizable. A conservative from the past, like one today, is inclined to be opposed to abortion and to hold patriotic views. They have no problem saying, “America First.” Until recently, most would have held respect for the FBI and CIA.
In schools of psychology, there’s an awareness of the concept of “projection.” One passionately polarizes to something or someone because they themselves are aware — on some level — of the issue in themselves. This isn’t a rock-solid law of human behavior but does offer some insight into human activity.
The left, lurching ever more extreme in their stance has come to actually adopt the stereotypical behavior of generic conservatism — an inflexibility and respect for authority, obedience, and order. It is now the left that actively seeks to block open communication, to side with a powerful central political authority and honor corrupt police-power federal institutions (they still apparently hate the local cop).
Most conservatives today, while still recognizably conservative, actively resist the encroaching authority of the “speech police” on campuses and elsewhere. While conservatism wishes to adhere to the constitutional freedoms that have been the bedrock of free society, the left now looks with derision upon virtually all established traditions and constitutional standards.
I wouldn’t go so far as to suggest that “conservatives are becoming liberal and liberals are becoming conservative” but there is clearly a dynamic in play that should be noted when seeking to understand the turmoil of our time.
Both sides of the political spectrum are valid templates for appraising social/political life. Some principles work better at some times and under some conditions but regardless, there’s an instinctual tendency to ally one’s self based on personal temperament — some people are “naturally” conservative and others “naturally” liberal. Psychologist Jordan Peterson notes this when he attributes the traits of “openness” vs. “conscientiousness.” While the proverbial pendulum continues to move back and fourth, it’s obvious that the sway is more extreme in our time. Many on the left wish to actively uproot our culture, history, and way of governance. They recognize that to do so they will need to eliminate opposition, and when they hold the levers of power, to use that power to punish their perceived enemies. Political philosopher, Hannah Arendt accurately noted that it is common knowledge that the “most radical revolutionary becomes a conservative the day after the revolution.” They are currently in the middle of their “revolution” and are already exhibiting the extreme positions one may feel comfortable in imposing when they feel they’ve won. Communist countries are not noted for their openness to diverse music genres and sexual lifestyles. In that regard, they have a lot in common with radical Islam which — again generically — can be called “conservative.” Being a conservative Muslim or communist of course does not mean one favors the freedoms of a constitutional republic and capitalist economic system (an attribute of an American conservative). In this sense one must acknowledge a pronounced difference between generic conservatism and the label as it is used to describe 19th century classical liberalism — self government with limited representational authority.
The Right’s extremism in America is one of passionate resistance. We do not wish to be dragged into another “utopia” after having seen where that story has led in the past. We like the order and stability of our traditions. The left is a catalyst for social entropy and their initial desire to literally ferment chaos is only a precursor to the establishment of a very rigid tyranny (a hint of which can be seen on many college campuses).
While so many “liberals” today note their fears regarding “climate change,” they should look with equal apprehension at the political “pole shift” now occurring that will surely cause the storms of social upheaval we’ve seen before that bring suffering on a mass scale. What is presently occurring in contemporary political alignment likely won’t be fully understood until long after a wake of destruction is left to future decades. At that point, the labels we choose to describe political allegiance will have become irrelevant.
