Morono-con populism
You read, I hope, John Schwenkler's excellent essay from The American Conservative in which he laid out a conservative case for taking food seriously as culture. Well, here's a ridiculous response from a right-winger who basically says to Schwenkler, "You're...
Politics as usual. Just cite the appropriate tribalisms and you'll save time and effort; the work's already been done.
Rod, you're probably going to want to rethink "retardocons." I'm no fan of the Brain Donor Wing of "conservatism," and I'm definitely not trying to join the League of Carpers. I am only speaking from personal experience: A couple of years ago I used the term in a blog post and received a note from a mother of a mentally impaired child who read the post. She gently but firmly rebuked me, saying that her child had heard the insult and it hurt her to hear it in any context.
I pulled it and she was grateful--and said she liked the blog, to boot. I know--no accounting for taste.
Just FWIW.
Rod, I've been thinking about this issue for some weeks since you've mentioned it. It seems to me there is a prejudice among American conservatives against growing your own food--maybe a stigma from the Depression?--it's okay to express solidarity with the Small American Farmer but they have to grow "normal" foods like potatoes and carrots and lettuce, not endives, bok choy and golden beets. Or they have to be "traditional" ranchers, not those grass-fed beef or pastured chicken people making waves (by going back to an even more conservative way of farming!). It's okay to eat Farmer John's produce and like it but you're not allowed to make too big a deal out of it or compare Farmer John with Farmer Bob and say one guy does things right and the other (who follows big agribusiness practices) isn't good enough.
I don't know what the name is for this kind of thinking (somehow retardocon doesn't seem to cover it) but it's as ingrained as Americans eating pumpkin pie for Thanksgiving but recoiling in suspicion and distaste at pumpkin puree used in pasta.
Maybe we could hire someone to do some Schoolhouse Rock type cartoons of the Founding Fathers growing and eating all kinds of All-American foods that are now rarely eaten (quince?) and considered frou-frou food for "commie liberals."
Rod,
Appreciate both your post and your frustration. "Retardocons" don't reflect conservatism in this country. It is for us who admire (and try to adopt) the crunchy con lifestyle to just keep plugging away and bring around others by the power of example.
It's hard to change one's personal habits. But "Retardocons" aren't the only ones to find this difficult. As you know, "Nobel laureate" Al Gore finds it difficult to reconcile his views on global warming with his ingrained and extravagant energy-wasting lifestyle.
For Christians, all this goes beyond ideology or utilitarian considerations (e.g., "saving the earth"). Rather, it is about detachment from worldly things and "dying to ourselves" in order to be reborn in Christ.
Maybe among American conservatives it's now more important to be seen as "just regular guys" rather than truly conservative, as in conserving and protecting our heritage. That's populism, right? Popcons?
As a pro-life Catholic, I beg you not to use "retarded" as a pejorative. There are heroic parents raising children with Downs Syndrome who would object to this.
OK, Dale, I changed it to "Moronocons."
You ask, "If that's what conservatism has come to, then ... who cares? Honestly, who cares?"
Just for the record: not I or any of my Republican born and raised siblings.
I read Schwenkler's post earlier and thought he made god sense. I think Mr. Pizza is the type of conservative who solves every debate by labeling someone a liberal or conservative. If you are a liberal, you are evil and wrong about everything. If you are a conservative, you are correct about everything. No gray. All shades of black and white. No real willingness or ability to think critically. Will not speak critically, in a constructive manner, about conservatives or conservatism. Bet he listens to Rush every day, or Hannity.
Steve
Dale Price and Rod Dreher:
Dale, great comment about the use of the word used originally by Rod in his post and used by me in my comment. Dale, that was a good catch and it was a phrase that I -- a nephew of a good-hearted and God-fearing but developmentally-disabled man -- should have avoided. I apologize. I was tempted to reply earlier to your comment, but I wanted to give Rod time to correct the phrase.
Rod, thanks for making the correction. You Da Man!
"It's tribalist, anti-intellectual, moronocon populism. If that's what conservatism has come to, then ... who cares? Honestly, who cares?"
Unfortunately, this is what has happened to the conservative movement, at least its most public and (seemingly) powerful wing. Witness the following post on another conservative Beliefnet blog.
blog.beliefnet.com/reformedchicksblabbing/2008/07/republicans-to-filibuster-unti.html
"He's right, high gas prices are a drag on our economy and our household spending budgets. Nothing impacts us more right now than the high price of oil. We know that we'll have an immediate drop in prices when they finally vote to end drilling because we saw a $10 drop when Bush lifted the presidential ban on drilling (and yeah, I know that the Bush admin isn't taking credit and attributes it to a drop in demand, sorry not buying it, the timing of the drop was too closely tied to Bush's announcement, demand has been dropping since April and there hasn't been a drop like this). Who knows how low it will go when the Congress finally commits to doing something."
The conservative movement has become identified with the most selfish, materialistic aspects of our culture. Market is glorified above all, and the individual be damned. Short-sighted solutions prevail over long-term, more well thought out ideas.
Thus our nation finds ourselves in this position.
Two points:
1.When any movement grows popular, it attracts stupid people. From the RINO Congress (remember all those Dems switching parties in the 90s?) to this guy.
2. Conservatives are using a simple defense mechanism. The fact is that for 20 or 30 years, liberals have used food as a way to impose their (in my opinion) fascistic ideology on people. From banning sweets in school, trying to tax junk food, hysteria over harmless pesticides, PETA pyschos, etc. The attack on food almost always comes from the left.
This is why Crunchy Cons is so important. Not only because the message is sound, but because this is a territory completely filled with statist left-wingers peddling government solutions.
3. Don't touch my pizza. There will be blood.
"Moronocon" seems a bit cumbersome. May I suggest "proctocon?"
Rod, tu es vir, as we Latins say. Thanks.
Moronocon flows nicely.
I also like "Brain-Free and Loving It!"
Here's a really simple conclusion we can draw about the aggrieved "moronocon" reader: he's not a conservative! He may vote Republican, go to church, and consider himself a "cultural conservative, but a true conservative would actually care about preserving the institutions that make up true culture.
This reader's alleged conservatism is confined to mockery of effete liberals. This may be a particularly vitriolic example of heartland snobbery but it's unfortunately relatively common. I think the reason people react this way to criticism of the American way of life is because they have been conditioned to react to liberalism emotionally rather than rationally. For all the good that folks like Rush Limbaugh have done for the movement, the blame for this kind of thinking lies squarely at their feet.
"Maybe among American conservatives it's now more important to be seen as 'just regular guys' rather than truly conservative, as in conserving and protecting our heritage. "
I think LeeAnn gets it exactly right here. I think this is another manifestation of what I pointed out on the "Obama: He's Big In Germany" thread below. That is, the right in this country is to a large extent obsessed with presenting the image of down-home folks in order to obscure their part in following policies that are far from conservative in any true sense of the word, policies which undermine the fabric of community and the needs of those same "down-home folks".
Slight digression: Maybe it's just me, but has anyone noticed how often politicians use the word "folks"? When was the last time you went to the movies and came back, and someone asked you if there were lots there, and you said, "Nah, just a couple dozen folks"? I come from a rural, Southern area, and we say "people"! Do people who are trying to be folksy say "folks" because "people" is from (gasp!) Latin via (even worse gasp!) French? I'm just askin'!
"The conservative movement has become identified with the most selfish, materialistic aspects of our culture. Market is glorified above all, and the individual be damned. Short-sighted solutions prevail over long-term, more well thought out ideas."
Though I have disagreed with ds0490's opinions on some other threads, I think he's got it exactly right here. "Conservatism" is no longer about being conservative in any rational meaning of that word.
It has often been noted that in many ways "hippie" types and traditional (as opposed to corporatist, big business) conservatives have a lot in common--distrust of big government and big business, preference for the local, love of the land, understanding of the value of community, etc. While some of the animosity between the two groups doubtlessly stems from some of the unconventional lifestyle choices of the hippies and their latter-day heirs, I think a lot of it comes from just such anti-intellectual, broad-brush, faux populist posturing as the responder to Schwenkler demonstrates. I think that the sooner we as a nation and a culture can get beyond such moronic, dualistic stereotyping the better. We might actually acomplish something, then.
I know that you were being humorous, but neither you nor Schwenkler should have responded. In no way was the response by the reader to Schwenkler that you quoted an argument.It was an insult disguised as an argument.
I'm not big on government spending, but I do wonder how much it would cost to get everyone in this country a basic book about logic and argumentation. The role of name-calling in lieu of argumentation is at an epidemic level in this country.
You and Schwenkler should just keep mustering facts and arguments that support your position. Anyone who actually has anything intelligent to say doesn't need to resort to poisoning the well. They let the facts and arguments speak for themselves. Oddly, I consider that a conservative position, where conservative means that one needs to be shown the absolute necessity for changing something before one signs off on it.
Morally speaking, the idea that one doesn't need to reflect on what one eats and where it comes from refutes itself. In Judaism, the laws of kashrut, many of which I personally disagree with, are meant to remind one that a moral life with God means that the consequences of all of our actions deserve attention. Looking the other way just doesn't cut it, morally speaking.
What's wrong with pizza or spareribs? I'm really not "getting" this.
Nothing is wrong with pizza and spareribs, and John Schwenkler never said so. You should read Schw's article, not the idiotic caricature of it that this robo-winger typed up. The robo-winger's answer to Schw's essay was, "He's just a liberal who don't like normal American food like the rest of us. String him up!"
Pondering the braying Schwenkler's essay provoked, probably the label "conservative" is less than useful to describe those of us attentive to the ideas of thinkers such Burke, Kirk, MacIntyre, and Berry rather than Limbaugh, Coulter, and Hannity, et al.
While it is a good and necessary thing to contend with the proponents of reactionary, knee-jerk attitudes over what constitutes truly conservative thinking, I suspect more than a few of us will be increasingly identifying as traditionalists, so as to especially set ourselves apart from "moronocons" and dittoheads and the rude and crude Savages.
I say "folks." I also go to farmer's markets and like pizza. :)
The Dallas Morning News did a good job covering American Slow food when it featured a small diner that specializes in chicken fried steak, hand tenderized, battered, and panfried. 'Bout an hour wait for each order to come out.
I like the idea of features spotlighting regional American foods
Don't forget 'freedom fries'.
Moronocon.com ... there's an idea for a web site.
Uh, I say "folks" all the time. Maybe it is a midwestern thing. I remember in high school we used "folks" to refer to our parents. "I've gotta ask my folks if that's ok." That sort of thing.
I am working on local food issues in Maryland and have yet to meet another crunchy con. Everyone assumes that I am a liberal because I eat so well. (www.EatLocalFrederick.com) I'll never forget Rod's first Crunchy Con article back in the day. *nostalgic sigh* Why should liberals get all the good food anyway?
Once again, conservatives slam head-on into the consequences of a bogus but successful meme - in this case, sliming people as elitist or not really American when they eat real food instead of processed cud, drink microbrews instead of industrial "beer," broil instead of deep fry, etc.
"If that's what conservatism has come to, then ... who cares? Honestly, who cares?" If you had asked that question when George H.W. Bush was burnishing his just-folks cred by munching pork rinds and complaining about broccoli in 1988, maybe you wouldn't be fretting about the cultural blowback from eating arugula now.
I think an element of this is due to the fact that the Republican party is now the party of the "working class" and they've dumbed down their message accordingly. Bush is the uber-folksy politician, who's arguments about terrorism (they're bad) and taxes (it's your money) are as simple as they get. And he ain't no tofu eatin' sissy.
It is more an anti-intellectualism which comes from the general culture than it is a particularly conservative argument. I think they're wrong, that if they make intelligent arguments, the voters will go along with them. But politicians are cynical and will do what works. On average, the Democrats arguments are less intellectual because they are appealing to an even dumber group of voters.
Conservatism used to be an intellectual movement. It is now a popular movement, and with that comes the attendant decline in average IQ.
It's tribalist, anti-intellectual, moronocon populism. If that's what conservatism has come to, then ... who cares? Honestly, who cares?
Truer words were never spoken . . . at least, not on this blog. Why not just give in, Rod, and admit that you're not a conservative? "Feel the fear and do it anyway," as a popular self-help book advised. I can attest that it feels very nice to move about freely once the "mind-forged manacles" are released.
I know you can't do this right now, but I'm just planting the idea so you'll remember it when the time comes. You know you feel it . . . rising within you, like Mole from "The Wind in the Willows," climbing, climbing into the light after giving up on the spring cleaning of his dusty underground home . . . .
. . . till at last, pop! his snout came out into the sunlight and he found himself rolling in the warm grass of a great meadow.
"This is fine!" he said to himself. "This is better than whitewashing!" The sunshine struck hot on his fur, soft breezes caressed his heated brow, and after the seclusion of the cellarage he had lived in so long the carol of happy birds fell on his dulled hearing almost like a shout. Jumping off all his four legs at once, in the joy of living and the delight of spring without its cleaning, he pursued his way across the meadow till he reached the hedge on the further side.
Just think about it. You know it could happen to you. ; )
Why not just give in, Rod, and admit that you're not a conservative?
Because I am a conservative. I'm only not a conservative to people on the Right and the Left who think this cartoon version of conservatism is the first and last word in right-wing politics.
Irony:
The Free Market true believers will not sanction for a moment the disbanding of the engorged farm bill which dictates lockstep what farmers will grow, and how much it will go for. They refuse to acknowledge that this policy swamps us with more corn than we can reasonably use, and so gets transmogrified into High Fructose Corny Syrup which can be, and often is, added to most anything, much to the detriment of our collective health and well-being.
They will not question the unholy matrimony between the USDA and the gigantic agribusiness corporations that have driven small family farms out of business in most places. The ones who yell the loudest about exporting jobs don't seem to care that we've also exported a lot of agriculture, leading to apples from China and grapefruit from Chile. They don't seem to care that cheap food NECESSITATES illegal labor - or at least work permits for short-term agriculture jobs young Americans aren't exactly lining up for.
I needn't go on, really...
Rod, this is what you just don't seem to get. This isn't a cartoon. It isn't a caricature. It's not even a bloody exaggeration. This is the reality of what the word "conservative" means to millions of the people who claim it for themselves. Get that through your head. YOU are the tiny outlier. You may stamp your feet and pout about it all you want, but it's the simple, empirical truth. I grew up in a town where someone like you might well be assaulted in public on suspicion of being a "fag" if some of the local Baptist youth overheard you discussing some of the things you talk about on this blog. You're fighting over this label with huge masses of people who think Kirk is nothing but captain of the Enterprise, and Burke is the local Chevy dealer, and that Democratic politicians are described in the Book of Revelation.
"Why not just give in, Rod, and admit that you're not a conservative?"
Of course he is, just as am I, and as are the rest of the 'minority' conservatives in the Burke/Kirk/ISI stream. The fact that Fox and the talk hosts, who are of a different stripe, are the ones who dominate conservative discourse in this country is what confuses the moronocons (and a lot of liberals too, apparently).
Hence, I submit that a certain amount of slack may be cut for some moronocons, due to a species of invincible ignorance.
Arugula, anyone?
Sigaliris & Allen:
You both read this blog, so I'm not about to say anything you don't know, but it needs saying:
For those of us who are conservative in politics and temperament, and *consequently* also believe in freedom, tradition, and stewardship, it is critical we remind people of our existence. Furthermore, those masses of "moronocons" have leftward dopplegangers for whom it has never occurred there are Republicans and Conservatives who are not wealthy, and do not spend their time twirling their waxed mustaches, smoking pipes, and plotting against brown people. Although I plead guilty to pipe-smoking.
There's plenty of ignorance to go around. To questions Rod's conservatism, actually, makes me wish I could speak with you at more length so it could be manifestly obvious that he IS a conservative. It makes no sense to suggest "Why don't you switch teams, already." You may as well ask why he doesn't become a Trotskyite, because he likes borscht.
Finally, I do also think it is important for us to note that the "moronocons" and their left-wing cognates are often great, upstanding people. Many of them simply don't think about politics much. I am friends with some moronocons who are as politically nuanced as ICBMs. Sometimes their opinions revolt me a little. I can't think of many other people, though, who'd I rather have in a foxhole with me.
Karlub,
What I'm getting at is that when you and Rod say "conservative in politics in temperment" you mean something by the word "conservative" that is completely different and often exactly opposed to what the large majority of our countrymen mean when they apply this word to themselves. I have no doubt as to the sincerity of Rod's beliefs and that they are very different than my own. But I maintain that in the US in 2008, it is anachronistic and inaccurate for him to use the same word to politically describe himself that the above-described "moronocon" uses -- especially since all evidence indicates the "moronocon" overwhelmingly has the numbers on his side.
It reminds me of my roommate's brother, a wonderful and very smart guy, who pedantically insists on referring to home heating systems as "air conditioning" on purely technical and contrarian grounds. Yes, it may be dictionary-accurate, but it's not helpfully communicative or representative of what the great majority of the populace means by that particular word.
Also, while the "moronocon" label has an amusing ring to it, lets be honest that the people we're talking about here are more frequently known as "rednecks". Anyone care to deny that?
These folks are my family, my friends, my coworkers, fellow churchmembers. I love 'em dearly, despite political and social views that make me long for a vodka martini the size of a Cadillac.
**lets be honest that the people we're talking about here are more frequently known as "rednecks". Anyone care to deny that?**
I'll deny it. 'Redneck' has a certain Southern or rural connotation. I'm from Pittsburgh, and there are plenty of urban/suburban folks with this mentality who couldn't be called 'rednecks' at all.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.