Internal Monologue

Continuing with my critique of conservative principles : 6. Human nature suffers irremediably from certain grave faults, the conservatives know. Man being imperfect, no perfect social order ever can be created. ... All that we reasonably can expect is a tolerably ordered, just, and free society, in which some evils, maladjustments, and suffering will continue to lurk. ... The ideologues who promise the perfection of man and society have converted a great part of the twentieth-century world into a terrestrial hell. OK, here's one I can get on board with, barring the sexist language. Human beings were not optimized for moral behavior. I share conservative disdain for perfectionism in political arrangements or formation of moral character. Anyone who is under the illusion that evil and suffering will disappear if social and economic conditions are improved to a certain point is foolish. The "Blank Slate" notion that humans are infinitely malleable through education and cultu...

More conservative principles and my reactions: 4. Conservatives are guided by their principle of prudence. ... Any public measure ought to be judged by its probable long-run consequences, not merely by temporary advantage or popularity. Liberals and radicals, the conservative says, are imprudent: for they dash at their objectives without giving much heed to the risk of new abuses worse than the evils they hope to sweep away. I certainly agree that we should act with prudence. Anyone who acts without regard to long-term consequences is mere foolish, not lacking in conservatism. Certainly conservatives are right to emphasize prudence. But I'm not willing to concede "prudence" as a conservative value. I think both liberals and conservatives value it. 5. The only true forms of equality are equality at the Last Judgment and equality before a just court of law; all other attempts at levelling must lead, at best, to social stagnation. OK, I don't believe in the Last Judgmen...

Here's #2: The conservative adheres to custom, convention, and continuity. ... Conservatives are champions of custom, convention, and continuity because they prefer the devil they know to the devil they don’t know. The interesting thing to point out here is that under this formulation, anything unknown is implicitly considered to be the devil. I think this reveals a fear of change that goes far deeper than a prudent skepticism of untried methods and ideas (which I think is a very good thing). It smacks of a knee-jerk reaction against any possible form of improvement or betterment: Even if circumstances now are hellishly bad (i.e. the devil they know), they are preferable to what might otherwise come about (the devil they don't know). I am doubly suspicious when this formulation comes from the mouths of those who are tremendously well-off with "the devil they know" and are directing this "wisdom" at those who are suffering from the defects of the current sys...

Up on Daily Dish, one of Sullivan's guest bloggers has posted 10 conservative principles , with a poll asking to which of them Sullivan's readers subscribe. I think a "yes-no" response is too simple, so here are the principles and my reactions to them: 1. The conservative believes that there exists an enduring moral order. That order is made for man, and man is made for it: human nature is a constant, and moral truths are permanent. ... Hmm. First of all, a liberal wouldn't use sexist language when trying to articulate truths about an enduring moral order, but we'll let that slide for now. I do believe that human nature has been constant, but that may change now that we finally have the tools to actually mess with it: genetic engineering, psycho pharmacology, cybernetic brain enhancement, etc. are either here or just around the corner. These offer the possibility of messing with our "source code" so-to-speak, and for the first time we really will be ...

The Kossacks are not happy about Congress giving Bush what he wants on the FISA bill : The Democrats in the US Senate are systematically getting rolled, once again, by veiled threats of terrorism, closed briefings about "traffic", and the implicit threat that if they don't give George Bush EXACTLY WHAT HE WANTS, they will be targeted in the next election. Where are the real patriots? Where are the men and women who value the American Experiment enough to stand for the Constitution, and the Civil Rights of citizens over campaign cash, and Rovian threats, deliverd with no subtlety, no real skill, and no power to effect, if they just stood up on their hind legs and made the case for the Separation of Powers? Neither is Liz Mair, posting on Daily Dish : It won't surprise many people to know that I am skeptical of what was passed. While I do feel that Congress needed to do something on the issue of surveillance before heading off on holiday, I had thought the propos...

This test gives you an Asperger's Syndrome Quotient , or "AQ". Mine is 24, which means I'm pretty geeky: more geeky than the average computer scientist, but less geeky than the average math contest winner. (HT: Sullivan )

Here's a fun quote from a piece about the "Republican Unburdening of the Soul Ritual": "See, you (meaning 'liberals', even though I had not offered him any political affiliation; all academics are liberals) hate George Bush because he represents everything you hate. I hate George Bush because he represents everything I believe in being completely fucked up and ruined." The profundity of that struck me. I've not yet heard a more concise, eloquent explanation of what the non-brainwashed part of the right-leaning electorate is experiencing these days. It also struck me as incredible that this is what political discourse v2007 sounds like: two people of opposing ideologies arguing about who hates George Bush more. Via Heraldblog .