Barry Knows Dead and Conservatism Ain't It

One of the benefits of being dead is that old Barry has a great deal of time on his hands. Time to observe what’s going on in America and, if required, take action as best I can given my current state of non-corporealness. For example, this weekend I’m planning on haunting a Bar-B-Q at Sean Hannity’s house and maybe appearing in a tortilla at a Minutemen meeting. I’ll see if I can get Reagan to come and we’ll really fuck with ‘em.

Anyway, I’ve been poking around the internet and happened upon a series of essays by comedian Richard Belzer entitled “The Death of Conservatism”. Naturally, old Barry was immediately interested in an opinion piece concerning both Conservatism and the dead.

Needless to say, Barry is not amused at this guy or his wandering missives about my cherished conservative principles. It's fuzzy, muddle-headed thinking like this that necessitated my returning from the dead when I should be should be enjoying the here after. Barry got here just in time.

Here it is, contained within 3 parts, so far, because there was just too much Crazy™ to fit into one:

The Death of Conservatism

The Death of Conservatism, Part 2

The Death of Conservatism, Part 3

He starts off on the wrong foot:

“…these are the fruits of a particular strain of conservative ideologues with a shared affinity for the Hobbesian view of humanity, which postulates that people are essentially evil and the role of the ruling class, the government, was to have a standing army and police presence and little else.”

Now, Barry understands full well why Richard Belzer, who is to punditry what Richard Belzer is to taxidermy, might think Conservatism evil and hope for its demise. Having watched the rise of the new Republican elite, who have categorically rejected the intellectual foundation of the Republican Party as handed down by yours truly, Mr. Belzer wrongly concludes that the current breed of Republican represents the Conservatism of the founding fathers and the G-Man.

He also, like so many modern day liberals, is surprisingly confused and bewildered by the very idea of liberty.

“Essentially that the "people" were totally on their own, frontier-style with no public services, healthcare, college grants, head start, maintenance of roads and bridges, public defenders, job training programs, Medicare, Medicaid; you get the picture.”

Actually, “on their own” is a fairly accurate synonym of being free. As in, “On one’s own to speak, feel, and live as one chooses”. Or, “On one’s own to come together with his fellow man for the betterment of society”.

Barry grew up on the frontier. We didn’t have Head Start, tuition assistance, enterprise zones, or job training programs. Life was a job training program. We didn’t have any of those things and yet we still had community, and a sense of decency for the welfare of our neighbors that ensured we’d look out for the least among us.

Which of us has a belief that people are “inherently evil”, Richard?

Barry and the rest of us knuckle-dragers got along just fine back then, thank you very much, though it's true that there was plenty of bullshit politicking and oppression of Negroes and Indians and the poor. Such is life.

But at least the oppressed had their individual self worth back then, and an unshakable desire to be free from the insidious influence of other men, unlike today where progress for the underclass is measured merely as a statistic and their welfare in enslavement to public largess. Wherever men are free, political equality is certain and individual advancement follows. Barry learned that you can’t free men by ensnaring them, however righteous your intentions might be.

That was right before I inherited a Department store and promptly and temporarily went bat-shit insane proving once and for all that welfare is almost always a poor policy choice.

Nonetheless, during my public life I did support numerous public works, along with Carl, like the Hoover damn and the Central Arizona Project Aqueduct, which directly supported the General welfare of all citizens. Barry is not a Libertarian and Conservatism is not the abandonment of the general welfare.

Too many liberals today can’t seem to fathom that freedom is a two way street that holds the promise of mankind’s redemption or damnation, depending on his choices. Socialism can’t change that. All it can do is eliminate a man’s right to choose and succeed or fail on his own terms virtually ensuring that fails on someone else's.

As I wrote back in 1960:

“Every man, for his own individual good and for the good of his society, is responsible for his own development. The choices that govern his life are choices that he must make; they cannot be made by another human being, or by a collectivity of human beings.”

Say what you will about old Barry, but goddamn if he isn’t a wordsmith of the highest fucking order.

“The conscience of the Conservative is pricked by anyone who would debase the dignity of the individual human being. Today¸ therefore he is at odds with dictators who rule by terror, and equally with those gentler collectivists who ask our permission to play God with the human race.”

But men like Richard aren’t satisfied with that, or confident in their ability to bring men together for the welfare of society without force. For all intents and purposes, liberty from oppression isn’t all that important, so long as the oppression results in some kind of material well-being:

“What do you get when 55 rich white landowners gather to form a more perfect union, establish justice and ensure domestic tranquility?”

The greatest, freest nation on Earth?

“A system that to this day protects the interests of the very rich!”

Like many modern liberals, Richard looks only to the material side of man’s nature, subordinating his political free will to the concept of economic equality. This is a common mistake, made more common simply be the fact that as we become wealthier and economically advanced as a people, the disparity in wealth between the richest and the poorest seeming overshadows the political freedom that made the disparity possible in the first place. It’s remarkably easy to take political freedom for granted when most in this county have never had to labor under a system that restricted it directly (though that’s in danger of changing) and focus on endless social engineering designed to bring about economic equality. That was true in my day and its truer now.

Which is not to say that the current administration, and Republicans in general, haven’t been corrupt when it comes to economic concerns. There’s no doubt really that the modern GOP undermines economic and political freedom in favor or narrow interests, corporate and religious mostly, for whom it tailors legislation designed to protect, enhance, and facilitate greed and inequity by the few in place of liberty and justice for the many. For that they oughta’ be hunted down right quick and kicked square in the ass.

But for God’s sake don’t blame the G-Man. Or Conservatism. I gave you people the key to the city, as handed to me by the founding fathers. You elected dull-witted corporate flacks and wanna be TV preachers who promptly organized a publicly funded coup. Find some candidates who are willing to commit to the freedom and dignity of the individual and then make the most of that promise. That’s the only way forward.

Even Hillary Clinton began public life as an AuH2O Girl. Since it seems as though she’s got a good shot at getting elected the next president, I think I’ll spend some time trying to bring the old girl back on the right path Obi-wan style.

How many times do I have to say it?

The Conservative supports the right of workers to unionize and bargain collectively for their own Betterment. But he also supports the right of the individual to eschew forced membership in such groups as his conscience dictates.

The Conservative supports access to education for all and the formation of public services that “form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty”. But Barry insists that these services be controlled at the local level, where they are accountable to the people who benefit or suffer under them.

The Conservative supports free enterprise and, as a direct consequence, sees Corporatism, as anathema to individual liberty, honest government, and democracy. As such we oppose laws that protect corporations from public accountability, specialized tax incentives for specific businesses, public funding or stipends of any kind for business, protectionism from foreign or domestic competition, and policy that subordinates the greater public good for the narrow corporate good.

The Conservative supports legislation that protects people from discrimination, enables and facilitates free speech, holds moneyed interests accountable to the people, seeks equality under the law, and protects the liberty of the individual. But we do not support legislation that treats the individual like dull witted chattel, who must be corralled and trained to better their natures. That’s the providence of T.V. preachers and Liberal do-gooders.

Richard asks,

“How did this legendarily generous and open nation become fearful, distrustful, anxious and worried about our families, our country, our future?”

Barry gets the last word.

Legendarily generous and open? Yep. That’s America, all right.

That’s Conservatism.