Democrats, Aristocrats, and the Torturer's Assistants

[justiceischeap]

Inspiring editorial at Body and Soul:
http://bodyandsoul.typepad.com/blog/2005/01/democrats_and_a.html

Traditional conservatism is the polar opposite of democracy. It assumes people can't -- or shouldn't -- think for themselves, and that they have to be lead, either by fear or p.r. (or a combination) to accept the natural order in which some people rule and others are ruled.

What leaves most progressives, even centrists, banging our heads against the walls and mumbling about pharisees and hypocrites is that this is obviously as true of modern conservatism as it has been of conservatism for thousands of years, and yet an astonishing number of people think that the nature of conservatism has changed, and that now it is somehow all about freedom and allowing every individual to achieve everything he or she can.

But in my lifetime, I don't think American conservatism has ever been as boldly aristocratic as it currently is: Do not ask questions. Do not expect even minimal accountability. Whatever they do is, by definition, perfect, because they do it and they are God's chosen. L'etat c'est moi. There's no denying we've had a few embarrassing presidents in our history, but when, before this millennium, have we seen the ascending of the idiot prince to the throne? And yet they call us an elite, those of us watching the little hope and security we have -- our pensions, our access to health care, the laws that keep us from being poisoned or losing our jobs unfairly, the investment in our kids' schools -- slip away.

No, perhaps those of us watching those things happen are not considered an elite. But those of us daring to notice and complain about it are. The fundamental civic obligation (not right, obligation) in a democracy -- paying attention and speaking up -- is deemed arrogant.