All the people who think there was some noble, credible US conservatism that has "fallen," or been "taken over" by Trumpism, tell me: why was it so weak? Why did it offer so little resistance? Why did it devolve so *easily* into reactionary madness? Doesn't it make you wonder?
Pizza's cooking, so: my theory of conservatism. Basically, in any society, there's a group/class/demographic that has power & privileges, sometimes economic, sometimes relating to race or caste. And every such group has a story about why their place at the top is justified.
For royalty it was the divine right of kings. For oligarchs or nobles is often some kind of "natural law" that makes them more refined/smart/wise than subaltern classes.
The US was founded on equality -- at least that's what it said on the tin -- so its ruling class (white property owning males) came up w/ a story about property rights, "free markets," "small government," & federalism. They *earned* their privileges!
As in all such stories, there's a class of true believers, a priesthood, that takes it seriously & explore its philosophical implications, etc. (This is basically what libertarians tried to do -- note that it never really caught on.) But in practice, in all societies ...
... when the story conflicts with the actual, proximate interests of the ruling class, the story goes overboard.

Nonetheless, as long as the privileged class is *secure*, it can be sincere about the story, even magnanimous. In the US this strain of conservatism ...
... has been called "patrician" or "compassionate." As long as the privileged white/male/Christian class feels safe, feels on top, it can be generous in allowing outsiders to come & enjoy its fruits. You saw a lot of this in Cold War conservatism -- a kind of evangelism.
But in all societies, when that privileged class begins feeling threatened, outnumbered, & insecure, the politesse fades. The high-toned philosophical justifications drop out. Raw tribalism takes over. The class is always, first & foremost, for its own continued hegemony.
And this has basically been the course of US conservatism in the 21st century: from a self-serious, high-falutin' "party of ideas" to a raw, raging army fighting for white hegemony. Once they got scared, all pretense of "free market" & "family values" went right out the window.
The point of this (pizza's ready) is that today's conservatives are just yesterday's conservatives, scared. The philosophical superstructure was *always* a veil over group interest. It never had any constraining or motivating power. It was epiphenomenal.
To the extent there's any conservative "thought" left in the US, it's vestigial, tended by priests who haven't yet gotten the memo that the priesthood is no longer needed, only infantry. </fin>

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with David Roberts

David Roberts Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @drvolts

12 Apr
Because I excel at time management, I've just been spending some time in a NextDoor thread about a petition that would upzone my neighborhood to allow for dense low-income house. Naturally, the neighbors are in a total panic. What about parking?!
I dropped in to say, "Please support upzoning. Seattle desperately needs new housing."

The very first response -- I'm not making this up -- was from Linda: "Not if Seattle would be more selective in new residents."

Golly. What do you suppose she means?
More Linda: "I was not being unkind, David. I just don't think it is right that so many move to Seattle from other areas because they know they can get so many freebies in Seattle that we end up paying for. Seattle used to be a beautiful city, it is not anymore."
Read 6 tweets
11 Apr
I have no daughters, so I have no idea what might be wrong with a grown man preying on underage girls. Can someone with daughters sketch out exactly what's going on here?
For the record: Obama used to say this all the time, and it was bullshit when he said it too.
For the record, what's wrong with this approach -- "empathy for those with whom I have direct experience" -- is that many of humanity's most pressing problems involve victims that are very far away from the perpetrators, in time/geography/social class.
Read 4 tweets
9 Apr
"Biden admin officials say [Trump's tax cut] increased incentives for companies to shift profits to lower-tax countries, while reducing corporate tax receipts in the US to match their lowest levels as a share of the economy since WWII." Are these not facts that can be verified?
Seems like the fact that it's true is more relevant than the fact that Bidenites say it. nytimes.com/2021/04/07/bus…
"Members of the Business Roundtable, which represents corporate chief executives in Washington, said this week that Mr. Biden’s plan for a global minimum tax 'threatens to subject the U.S. to a major competitive disadvantage.'" 🙄
Read 4 tweets
8 Apr
Just going to enjoy a moment of uncomplicated pleasure in @ezraklein telling me that the Democratic Party has more or less conceded that I'm right about everything. nytimes.com/2021/04/08/opi…
Sure, others were right too. You can go to their feeds if you want to hear about that.
"They view the idea that a carbon tax is the essential answer to the problem of climate change as being so divorced from political reality as to be actively dangerous."
Read 4 tweets
8 Apr
I know I should probably be trying to decode the 12D chess or whatever, but I'm distracted by all the mistaken assumptions, bad history, poor reasoning, & preening vanity here. washingtonpost.com/opinions/joe-m…
I'm trying to resist yelling about this piece for all eternity, but the key question Manchin doesn't address is, why, if small/rural states are already over-represented in the Senate, we *also* need a 60-vote supermajority requirement.
Or why the public would trust a Senate that passes legislation less than one that can't.
Read 12 tweets
4 Apr
Must-read investigative journalism from @JaneMayerNYer (if that's not redundant) shows that the right is in a bit of a panic about HR1, the voting rights bill, because it's wildly popular with the public, even a majority of Rs. newyorker.com/news/news-desk…
Hey @JoeManchinWV? This is how they're talking about the voting rights bill in private:

"Instead, a senior Koch operative said that opponents would be better off ignoring the will of American voters and trying to kill the bill in Congress."

Do you want to be complicit in that?
Imagine sitting around having this discussion and never thinking, "gosh, I wonder if maybe we're horrible fucking people?"
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!