The New Burkeian

Reflections on the Revolution in Conservatism

Friday, November 05, 2004


I have recently come under attack as being a fascist. I think the intention was to lable me as a nazi, so let me first address this.

I have not, nor ever will be anti-semetic. I attended school with a large Jewish population and count some of my best friends as Jews. I am sensitive to anti-semetism, as well as accusations from the Left over the influence of Jews worldwide. I am a supporter of Israel, and will defend her status to the very end. I also understand that many Jews support the Left agenda in this country. Every man is entitled to his own opinion within our great country, whether I agree with it or not. I must mention that the Republicans, as a party, have supported minority groups within this country since the Civil War. They supported Civil Rights, as well. They also are the biggest supporters of Israel. And to add the icing to the cake, I might mention that this Republican administration under President Bush has appointed more minorities to positions of power than probably all of the Democratic administrations combined.

Now let me distinguish fascism from nazism. Fascism is a theory that centralizes power to the central government, especially in the areas of the economy. It is essentially an off-shoot of socialism without the elimination of private property. Government control of the industrial sector is essential in fascism. As a conservative I believe the government has no privileges in this area. I support an economy with less government regulation, as the President does. I also support the private sector as essential to the continued growth of our national economy. Part of the lessening of government control includes the lessening of the tax burden on the general public. Fascists and socialists would have us tax the American to death. Indeed I would equate many liberal policies to these failed ideas. France is going bankrupt people! Their fascist/socialist policies do not work.

In the area of centralizing government control I must also disagree. I am a firm believer in the Constitution, and specifically the 10th Amendment. That is to say that all powers not specifically granted to the central government should be reserved for the states. Many liberals would have the 14th Amendment, enacted simply to protect the rights of minorities, impose central government control in every aspect of American lives. However, the specific power of the central government to dictate American foreign policy does not equate our mission for worldwide democracy to fascism. In fact, advocating the rights of dictators to rule their own countries as they wish (cultural relativism?) bears more resemblance to fascism. I'll even go so far as to say that liberal rhetoric resembles this move towards fascist ideals.

The New Burkeian will not sit back and allow liberals to advocate a policy of ignorance. This is the quest of the 'actionary'. It is to attack the source of cultural relativism. If we really believe that there is a world community, then there must be some universal truths about the world community. Democracy is not a white, European right. Liberty and the pursuit of freedom is international. If it takes America to show this to the world, then so be it. I will not sit back while new Saddams and Hitlers rise up in the world. We will preempt. We will advocate democracy in every corner of the world until the ideals of hate and biggotry are forever destroyed. If you believe that democracy is not universal, then you are my enemy. If you believe that liberty cannot be experienced by every human being in this world, then you are my enemy. If you believe that this is not justice, then you are the enemy of all freedom loving people in this world.

If you disagree, then so be it. As an advocate for democracy I will not impose my will upon you. I think the American Electorate decided where they see the future of America, though. Until my accusers, and liberals in general, begin to understand the mission of the 'actionary', they will continue to advocate the enslavement of people worldwide to the despots of hate and biggotry. The New Burkeian will not sit by the wayside.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm unsure of how serious these posts are; not in the sense of a comical inflection, but rather, I'm unsure of how fully you intend to develop your arguments. The words and tone you use as a vehicle for your ideas are becoming more poignant and extreme, so one of two things is happening:

Scenario 1: You're absolutely right, and with each new post everything seems to make more sense because of some objective and inherent perfection of your argument.

Scenario 2: Your own political rhetoric speaks to you so strongly that it pushes you into a more refined (or perhaps extreme) segment of your own beliefs.

Either way, posing an objection or a question may more effectively help your reader understand this perfection (1) or it may help you better define yourself (2). You're obviously familiar with some popular philosophies - you may have noticed that the stronger philosophers give more attention and dimension to opposing arguments than to their own. I'll expound on this with an example.

You give conservativism a rich framework with many dimensions - conservativism, neo-conservativism, and now this New Burkeian conservativism. In opposition, you give liberalism only one dimension ("Left"), and make passing conclusions that they endorse fascism. If these "enemies", as you put it, are so simple and shallow, it probably isn't even worth your time to mention them. Of course, I'd consider the contrary.

To conclude the above point, a lot of political "writers" nowadays like Ann Coulter, Michael Moore, Sean Hannity, and the like, don't humanize or develop their opposition. The result is, for lack of a better name, "Tabloid Politics". This garbage just riles their own troops and increases the gulf between parties. You seem to be mobilizing your brain more than these thugs; this is the only reason I'm pointing this out.

A final thought:
I submit that the most (or only) effective way for a conservative to battle a liberal, or visa-versa, is the following:
1. Construct and summarize your opponent's position more effectively than your opponent can.
2. Argue that it is perfect with respect to its ideals.
3. Explain why it cannot work due to our nature as humans and the present occasion of our world.

It takes more thought than most people (including me) care to donate. It's easier to resort to name-calling (ala O'Reilly, Franken) or to say somebody eats babies (which are actually delicious when in season). All in all, keep writing and I'll keep reading.


November 6, 2004 at 3:42 PM  
Anonymous source code rights said...

I don't know if you've noticed, but the competition amongst resell rights providers has become dog eat dog.

It's a huge market, but you end up competing against the big dogs every time.

The solution, in my opinion, is in private label and source code rights.

Simply put, these are the groundwork for creating your own products and services which you are then the sole owner of.

With private labels you get to brand your own identity and all the sudden you are no longer competing with hundreds or even thousands of people to sell the same old products.

If you want to learn more about how to put yourself ahead of the pack with ease then check out this great provider...

source code rights

May 13, 2006 at 4:33 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home