Replies

A while back, my tagline read "The only problem I have with conservatism is conservatives." And you two's thinking provides a perfect example.

I'm 32. Younger folks turning towards the Right/conservatism don't need people like you turning them away by questioning their motives, intentions, or sincerity.

Being a reactionary is not good by itself. But that's what so-called conservatives are really good at. React! React! React!

Personally speaking, I don't even consider myself a conservative anymore. No one could accuse me of being friendly with any part of Leftist thought, either.

Oh, and Aetius, let me address something you said specifically. You said, "I also get the sense that these 'Hipublicans' are steeped in left-wing ideology in the way they spout mindless platitudes about the glories of diversity." That's the point!

This is a dual-edged sword that works in the Right's favor. First, and I can personally attest to this, they recognize the utter nonsense that they had been indoctrinated with. Second, they realize that diversity of opinion is great, not diversity for diversity's sake.

If the sum is greater than its parts, strengthen the sum by strengthening the parts. In other words, you should welcome them and let each one be edified through debate, not cast aside or shunned.

"I'm 32. Younger folks turning towards the Right/conservatism don't need people like you turning them away by questioning their motives, intentions, or sincerity. "

Its perfectly legitimate to question motives and intentions. Those things lead to action. Its good to know where people stand on the issues.

"Being a reactionary is not good by itself. But that's what so-called conservatives are really good at. React! React! React! "

Sometimes that is all you can do. Twenty yrs ago the thought of having to define marriage as it always has been and always should be would have sounded crazy. Yet here we are now trying to do just that. And why? Because the far left has attempted to use the courts to force gay marriage on the entire nation. What else is there to do but 'react' and counter attack?

"Oh, and Aetius, let me address something you said specifically. You said, "I also get the sense that these 'Hipublicans' are steeped in left-wing ideology in the way they spout mindless platitudes about the glories of diversity." That's the point!

This is a dual-edged sword that works in the Right's favor. First, and I can personally attest to this, they recognize the utter nonsense that they had been indoctrinated with. Second, they realize that diversity of opinion is great, not diversity for diversity's sake. "

I hope you're right about this. But I have my doubts. Just look at President Bush when he speaks of diversity. He sounds no different than Ted Kennedy. More and more one hears the 'conservative' GOP talking heads talking about how diversity of race/ethnicity is by itself a great thing not only to be applauded, but to be actively sought. Now I'm not even saying right here that diversity is a bad thing, but it seems that if one is lauding our ever-increasing diversity then what they are actually cheering on is the movement away from a white majority. Now maybe that is a good thing, but maybe its not. My point is that it has become accepted that 'less-white' is good, but I wonder if the diversitycrats would apply this same logic to all the non-white nations of the world? Do they need diversifying?

Anyway, I agree with you that diversity of opinion is good, but that is not the type of diversity Sandra Day O'Connor made acceptable in her decision-deciding opinion. If you really think that the tides are turning against this type of mindset then please tell me what makes you so confident.

"If the sum is greater than its parts, strengthen the sum by strengthening the parts. In other words, you should welcome them and let each one be edified through debate, not cast aside or shunned."

I do welcome them, and I don't want them to be cast aside or shunned because they don't agree with me 100%. But I am worried about the future of the GOP and conservative movement. Already the GOP refuses to give voice to popular discontent on such issues as immigration and racial preferences. Look at the polls. Most Americans want less immigration, but the GOP is backing plans to give us more. Most Americans are against racial preferences, yet the most we get from the GOP is an awful amicus brief in the UofMichigan case which basically sided with the Left's major point ---that achieving diversity is a compelling state interest. So here you have two issues where the 'conservative' position is the majority mainstream position of Americans, yet the GOP refuses to embrace these potentially huge vote-winning positions. And I just don't see this new breed of 'Hipublicans' being any different.

But as I said, there is not much written about this group. It is nebulously defined, and perhaps doens't even represent a significant group of like-minded people. So we may be arguing about nothing.