{"id":3998,"date":"2010-04-11T10:23:34","date_gmt":"2010-04-11T14:23:34","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/?p=3998"},"modified":"2010-04-11T12:35:52","modified_gmt":"2010-04-11T16:35:52","slug":"to-conserve-to-progress","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/2010\/04\/11\/to-conserve-to-progress\/","title":{"rendered":"to conserve&#8230; to progress&#8230; to act liberally&#8230;"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p align=\"justify\">Reading along about the Republicans&#8217; meetings in New Orleans, I found few articles that I could finish. They were too monotonous, boring. I guess I thought the Party of &quot;No&quot; was something of a Democrat Talking Point, but if there were any things said in the Big Easy other that &quot;Obama is bad,&quot; I couldn&#8217;t tell you what they were. I was thinking back about what I thought &quot;conservative&quot; really meant when I first heard about such things in College [the Kennedy years]. I thought I sort of knew, but now I wonder what they want to &quot;conserve&quot;: <strong>Nixon\/Agnew<\/strong>? <strong>Reagan\/Bush<\/strong>? <strong>Bush\/Cheney<\/strong>? The Contract with America [and the escape of <strong>Newt Gingrich<\/strong>]? <strong>Michael Steele<\/strong>? The War on Terror, the Torture Program, Deregulation? the Financial Crisis?<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">Recently, I&#8217;ve personally been conflicted about the term &quot;progressive.&quot; In general, the people I think of as the &quot;progressives&quot; are disillusioned and negative about Obama too. He&#8217;s not undoing enough about Bush; he&#8217;s not moving forward enough on social issues; he&#8217;s not busting Wall Street hard enough; we&#8217;re still fighting two wars. I feel some of those things too. But I&#8217;m not sure I can define &quot;progressive&quot; with any more precision than I can define &quot;conservative.&quot; &quot;Progressing&quot; to where? Every attempt I make to construct a definition feels like it&#8217;s either utopian or &quot;not conservative.&quot;<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">If the power of conservatism is its &quot;no&quot; to the progressive agenda, and the power of the progressives is in its &quot;no&quot; to the conservatives, where does that leave us? I wish that what I&#8217;m saying here is the musing of an old man housebound by the pollen, but I have a creepy feeling that it&#8217;s more than that. It might be where we are right now &#8211; a war of &quot;no&quot; as meaningless as some of the ideological wars of history. The thing the Conservatives seem to want us to conserve is some of the worst of our history. The place the Progressives want us to head does not represent a consensus, and may be more of a utopian dream than a reality [though it certainly captures my fancy more than the alternative].<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">I guess I think of Obama as liberal person, at least in the way I understand the term.<\/div>\n<ul>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Liberalism\"><strong><u>Liberalism<\/u><\/strong><\/a> [from the Latin <em>liberalis<\/em>, &quot;of freedom&quot;]  is the belief in the importance of liberty  and equality. Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding  of these principles, but most liberals support such fundamental ideas  as constitutions, liberal democracy, free and  fair elections, human rights, free  trade, secularism, and the market economy. These ideas are often accepted even among  political groups that do not openly profess a liberal ideological orientation. Liberalism encompasses several intellectual trends and traditions,  but the dominant variants are classical liberalism, which became  popular in the 18th century, and social liberalism, which became popular in the 20th  century.<\/sup><\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\"><sup>Liberalism first became a powerful force in the Age of Enlightenment, rejecting several foundational  assumptions that dominated most earlier theories of government, such as hereditary  status, established religion, absolute monarchy, and the <span class=\"mw-redirect\">Divine Right of Kings<\/span>. The early  liberal thinker John Locke, who is often credited for the  creation of liberalism as a distinct philosophical tradition, employed  the concept of <span class=\"mw-redirect\">natural rights<\/span> and the social contract to argue that the rule  of law should replace absolutism in government, that  rulers were subject to the consent of the governed, and that  private individuals had a fundamental right to life, liberty, and property.<\/sup><\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup>The revolutionaries in the American Revolution and the French Revolution used liberal philosophy to justify the  violent overthrow of tyrannical rule, paving the way for the  development of modern history in tandem with liberal history. The 19th century saw liberal  governments established in nations across Europe, Latin America,  and North America. Liberal power  increased even further in the 20th century, when liberal democracies  triumphed in two world wars and survived major ideological challenges  from fascism  and communism.  Conservatism and fundamentalism, however, remain powerful  opponents of liberalism. Today, liberals are organized  politically on all major continents. They have played a  decisive role in the growth of republics,  the spread of <span class=\"mw-redirect\">civil rights<\/span> and civil liberties, the establishment of the modern welfare state, the  institution of religious toleration and religious freedom, and the development of globalization.  To highlight the importance of liberalism in modern life, political  scientist Alan Wolfe claimed that &quot;liberalism is the answer for which  modernity is the question&quot;.<\/sup><\/div>\n<\/ul>\n<div align=\"justify\">The politics of America in my adult life have so poisoned and stereotyped the noun Liberal that it&#8217;s become something not to be for fear of being stoned. So, maybe we&#8217;ve come to see the term &quot;progressive&quot; as a more socially acceptable modern version. But &quot;liberal&quot; is really an adjective:<\/div>\n<blockquote>\n<div align=\"justify\"><strong><font color=\"#200020\">lib&middot;er&middot;al<\/font><\/strong>&ensp;[lib-er-<em>uh<\/em>l, lib-r<em>uh<\/em>l]<\/div>\n<ol> <strong><font color=\"#200020\">&ndash;adjective<\/font><\/strong>          <\/p>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\">favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.<\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\">(often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.<\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\">of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.<\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\"><strong><font color=\"#200020\">favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.<\/font><\/strong><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\"><strong><font color=\"#200020\">favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.<\/font><\/strong><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\"><strong><font color=\"#200020\">of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.<\/font><\/strong><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\"><strong><font color=\"#200020\">free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.<\/font><\/strong><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\"><strong><font color=\"#200020\">open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.<\/font><\/strong><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\"><strong><font color=\"#200020\">characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor.<\/font><\/strong><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\"><strong><font color=\"#200020\">given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation.<\/font><\/strong><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\"><strong><font color=\"#200020\">not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.<\/font><\/strong><\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\">of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts.<\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\">of, pertaining to, or befitting a freeman.<\/div>\n<\/li>\n<div align=\"justify\"> <strong><font color=\"#200020\">&ndash;noun<\/font><\/strong><\/div>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\">a person of liberal principles or views, esp. in politics or religion.<\/div>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<div align=\"justify\">a member of a liberal party in politics, esp. of the Liberal party in Great Britain.<\/div>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n<div align=\"justify\">The definitions have some of the flavor of <em>progress<\/em>, true enough. But I think of the adjective as more meaning something like <em>giving<\/em>, <em>accepting<\/em>, <em>generous, tolerant<\/em>, and <em>not cynical<\/em>. And I think of the adjective conservative&nbsp; as an opposite. Conservative people are mostly afraid that others are going to steal their &quot;stuff.&quot; In fact, I may have happened onto what I think Conservatives are trying to &quot;conserve.&quot; It&#8217;s their &quot;stuff&quot; [and if I&#8217;m honest about how I feel about Conservatives myself, a lot of them seem to be out to take away &quot;my stuff&quot; and &quot;our stuff&quot;].       <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">So for as much as the Republicans in New Orleans raled and ranted, it could all be reduced down to &quot;<strong><font color=\"#200020\">Obama wants to take our &#8216;stuff&#8217; &#8211; and we&#8217;re going to stop him!<\/font><\/strong>&quot; And the Progressives are correct in looking at the subtext, &quot;<strong><font color=\"#200020\">The Republican Conservatives want to keep on taking our &#8216;stuff,&#8217; and we&#8217;re going to stop them!<\/font><\/strong>&quot; I think what Obama actually wants is for us to become more <em>giving<\/em>, <em>accepting<\/em>, <em>generous, tolerant<\/em>, <em>and not so&nbsp; cynical<\/em>. I&#8217;d like that myself. It&#8217;s definitely a nice thought. It reminds me of T.S.Eliot&#8217;s ending for his poem, <a href=\"http:\/\/eliotswasteland.tripod.com\/\" target=\"_blank\"><strong><font color=\"#200020\">The Wasteland<\/font><\/strong><\/a>:<\/p>\n<table cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"5\" border=\"0\" align=\"center\">\n<tr>\n<td>\n<div align=\"justify\"> Then spoke the thunder<br \/>      DA<br \/>      <strong><font color=\"#200020\"><em>Datta<\/em>:<\/font><\/strong> what have we given?<br \/>      My friend, blood shaking my heart<br \/>      The awful daring of a moment&#8217;s surrender<br \/>      Which an age of prudence can never retract<br \/>      By this, and this only, we have existed<br \/>      Which is not to be found in our obituaries<br \/>      Or in memories draped by the beneficent spider<br \/>      Or under seals broken by the lean solicitor<br \/>      In our empty rooms<br \/>      DA  <br \/>      <strong><font color=\"#200020\"><em>Dayadhvam<\/em>:<\/font><\/strong> I have heard the key<br \/>      Turn in the door once and turn once only<br \/>      We think of the key, each in his prison<br \/>      thinking of the key, each confirms a prison<br \/>      Only at nightfall, aethereal rumours<br \/>      Revive for a moment a broken Coriolanus<br \/>      DA<br \/>      <strong><font color=\"#200020\"><em>Damyata<\/em>:<\/font><\/strong> The boat responded<br \/>      Gaily, to the hand expert with sail and oar<br \/>      The sea was calm, your heart would have responded<br \/>      Gaily, when invited, beating obedient<br \/>      To controlling hands<br \/>      \t\t  I sat upon the shore<br \/>      Fishing, with the arid plain behind me<br \/>      Shall I at least set my lands in order?<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<p>Explained in the accompanying footnotes:<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">&#8216;<strong><font color=\"#200020\">Datta, dayadhvam, damyata<\/font><\/strong>&#8216; [<strong><font color=\"#004000\">Give, sympathize, control<\/font><\/strong>]. The  fable of the meaning of the Thunder is found in the  <em>Brihadaranyaka&#8211;Upanishad<\/em>&#8230; <\/div>\n<ul>\n<div align=\"justify\"><font color=\"#004000\">The  Hindu  fable referred to is that of gods, men, and demons each in turn asking  of their  father Prajapati, &quot;Speak to us, O Lord.&quot; To each he replied with the one   syllable &quot;DA,&quot; and each group interpreted it in a different way:  &quot;Datta,&quot; to  give alms; &quot;Dayadhvam,&quot; to have compassion; &quot;Damyata,&quot; to practice  self-control.  The fable concludes, &quot;This is what the divine voice, the Thunder,  repeats when  he says: DA, DA, DA: &#8216;Control yourselves; give alms; be compassionate.&#8217;  Therefore one should practice these three things: self-control,  alms-giving, and  compassion.&quot; <\/font><\/div>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Reading along about the Republicans&#8217; meetings in New Orleans, I found few articles that I could finish. They were too monotonous, boring. I guess I thought the Party of &quot;No&quot; was something of a Democrat Talking Point, but if there were any things said in the Big Easy other that &quot;Obama is bad,&quot; I couldn&#8217;t [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3998","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3998","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3998"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3998\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3998"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3998"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3998"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}