Home > My Commentary, Uncategorized > Why I Write

Why I Write

November 23, 2009 Leave a comment Go to comments

One of the reasons that I started this blog is to convey concrete information about conservatism and the center-right political perspective. If I write about policy, I do it because I believe that the conservative approach to social issues, law, and government administration is the more prudent. If I write about culture, I do it out of personal interest and I will utilize a perspective on aesthetics and language that I generally label “conservative.” I realize that this begs some definition, and I hope that as the blog grows and becomes more comprehensive, that this definition will be revealed.

As a conservative it should come as no surprise that much of what I write about will be anti-left. However, while there are plenty of other blogs that are merely dedicated to mocking the Left, leftist ideas, and personalities (just as there are plenty that mock the Right), I will make a most earnest effort here to propose rational alternatives to leftist policies, to counter leftist media with real evidence of its numerous fallacies, and critique leftist philosophy and culture honestly. Accordingly, this will involve as fair and thorough of a deconstruction of the Left as I can provide. I will try my hardest to avoid all the classic fallacies in argumentation that so dominate the political atmosphere these days and I will develop my argument with transparent logic and reference evidence from history, social science, and professional investigative journalism.

As a partisan, I have always been interested in debate as a form of expression. In the political world, it is public debate that theoretically allows people to choose between candidates and policy variants as they openly observe the strength and weaknesses of each in direct opposition to the other. But, I believe that the playing field in the world of ideas has been unbalanced for some time and it is only getting worse. There is no need here to get into a long discussion about the political bias in media and academia. It exists and there are some good websites out there that document, analyze and act on this phenomenon every day. (Here, here and here, and here.) Although complaining about it is sometimes mocked as “ whining”, it is a real problem and one I believe that affects the political culture more profoundly than is usually admitted.

The primary problem with political and intellectual bias is that it creates a situation where free inquiry becomes impossible, as bonafide information cannot be presented into an objective forum without overt or implied smears attached to it. It creates an intellectual vacuum where complete evidence is made unavailable because one side is always disallowed, or tacit approval is given which allows unfair attacks on the disfavored position. In my somewhat libertarian view, this attempt at information control is harmful to thought and suggests a moral conceit that comes from I know not where.

I am the type that does not cower from any idea labeled “extremist” or “loony” or “right-wing”: or “left-wing” or anything like that unless I have had a shot at understanding it myself first. Even then, I am not the type of person who will capriciously use a loaded adjective against a position that insinuates I am in any way smarter or, especially, have a superior moral compass or ability to reason than the person who holds that view (though I still may use loaded adjectives-it makes writing more interesting ). If I think the position is wrong or contradictory and holds a number of paradoxes that make it untenable, I will point them out and I will argue against that position rationally, as the traditional rules of rhetoric require. I think it is a good rule of thumb if one is to learn anything to hold fast to the logic “that even a stopped clock is right twice a day” no matter how much we dislike that damned clock.

I personally dislike and revile the political smear. And yes, I agree that it is done to and for both the Left and the Right. However, I do not write this blog as an appeal to the high-minded who seek diverse viewpoints and effete and wonkish squabbling over some finite aspect of social policy. I firmly believe in conservatism and think it is very important for conservatives to endlessly and vigorously critique the Left in all its political and (suprapolitical) cultural manifestations. I am tired of the victimization that is rife in the field of political debate and all the attempts to correct that and make the debate more “civil.”

Like most conservatives, I have been called a racist or some “…IST” for my positions on issues that often times have nothing or very little to do with any identity group at all. I am not someone who honors that smear with the requisite “I have friends that are….”. I think that by acknowledging the smear and allowing it to become the issue we give it too much life and we give undo respect to feeble arguments and the people that stoop to use political correctness when it is the only arrow in their quiver. If one reads what is going on in the blogosphere and also in the mainstream press today, this attitude of having no desire to explain yourself after, well, explaining yourself in an article or posting, usually gets criticized as intolerance or the dreaded incivility. It is none of that, of course, but most likely a willingness to avoid an endless snarking session with some troll trained by or mimicking a Soros-funded hack dedicated to making you waste your precious time with them.

Liberals look for concealed racism or some other concealed bigotry in their opponents because it strengthens their claim to moral superiority and as such, they believe that even if they lose the argument based on the rules of rational debate, they can still claim some sort of moral victory in the long run. This allows them to convince themselves that they have been courageous and have leavened the political culture somehow for the “larger cause” or for “cosmic justice” even if their charges were proven specious and based on little evidentiary fact. They have, after all, spread the “enlightened” word to a “benighted” conservative; and for some, that is merely enough, so let’s party tonight!

I say, so be it. I want my blog to be uncomfortably challenging to those people. I want them to re-think some of the prejudices they have that result in the most glaring bigotry that exists in American society today. I want to force onto them some of the same intellectual self-reflection and navel- gazing they claim many conservatives do not have, but that they possess in spades. I want them to realize that a lot of what they believe is based on an overblown self-estimation and a vicarious association with a small-minded, yet conceited elite that is not free of its own special kind of resentment. Yet, I insist that when the idea or the position merits it , the information I offer will be verifiable.

My voice may at times be uncompromising, but in the face of political turmoil and chaos ginned up in extreme times, clarity of thought and defense of the ideas of liberty are not vices. Specious arguments, debate without rules, and gratuitous smears poison the well and aid us all in our path to civil unrest and a culture of mutually assured deracination. Although this may not be a blog that speaks to the Left and liberals and it will contain some necessary venting against them, it will still be one with integrity.

  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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: