The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy, that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.
(John Kenneth Galbraith, “Stop the Madness," interview by Rupert Cornwell, Toronto Globe and Mail, July 6, 2002.)
I have been saying for years that the root cause of the “conservative” psychosis is fear—an intense, soul-contorting fear of loss that makes “conservatives” extraordinarily selfish.
While all of us have selfish tendencies, decent people grow in self-control and wisdom by recognizing those tendencies, restraining them, and cooperating with others in mutually beneficial activities—like rational self-governance.
“Conservatives” find such growth nearly impossible because of their deep-rooted fears. And that makes them unsuited to rational self-governance. Even relatively “normal” conservatives find it very hard to engage in mutually beneficial governmental compromise. Their natural inclination is to use power rather than compromise to get their way.
Moreover, their antisocial tendencies make it nearly impossible for them to maintain that they care about decency. Their claims that they advocate decent human values are hypocritical even when they are trying to look reasonable. And they become blatantly hypocritical when they stop trying to look reasonable.
The fundamental “conservative” contradiction appears in the clash between the true selfish inclinations of “conservatives” (which force them to champion personal freedom and to thwart government) and their incompatible attempts to seem decent (which force them to mouth support for compassion and charity).
Here are just three of the myriad “conservative” hypocrisies that arise from that basic contraction.
The theory of privation. “Conservatives” have the audacity to suggest that poverty builds character while conveniently ignoring the systemic barriers and disparities that keep people disadvantaged economically. Some of them even claim to be “self-made” successes and suggest that everyone can climb like they did. (Do I hear Tim Scott?) These are convenient lies. No one is “self-made.” Even if not a single individual person in their whole lives gave them a break—which is damn near impossible if you achieve worldly success—they live in a society that wants to give everyone a break, so long as it espouses liberal values and not “conservative" selfishness.
The theory of meritocracy. “Conservatives” have the audacity to claim that merit is what makes one rise in society. This is self-flattering to those who have achieved some worldly success, just as is the myth of the “self-made man.” But the truth is that privilege plays a massive role in determining who gets ahead in life. Those born into wealth or social standing or whiteness have a head start that no amount of hard work can truly overcome. There is no level playing field unless enlightened government does the leveling.
The theory of voluntary charity. “Conservatives” have the audacity to claim that charity should be an individual choice, rather than a collective responsibility. The truth is that a robust government safety net is necessary if human well-being is to advance beyond the dog-eat-dog stage that “conservatives” still live in—as the success of liberal democracies demonstrates. On top of that, the notion that elective charity can meet the needs of the majority of citizens, who are impoverished due to the greed of the few, is a self-serving cop-out. Apparently, personal responsibility only applies to “conservatives.” The rest of society is left to fend for itself.
So, the notion that poverty builds character, ignoring as it does the systemic barriers faced by the less fortunate, is clearly hypocritical. Similarly, the belief in meritocracy fails to acknowledge the role of privilege in determining success, rendering it nothing more than a chimera. And finally, the insistence that charity is an individual choice disregards the importance of collective responsibility and the structural role of government in caring for all citizens equally.
The putative philosophical justifications for the selfishness of “conservatives” are insupportable and morally bankrupt.
The great philosophical quest of “conservatives” to justify the unjustifiable keeps failing.
That is why they have turned to power as their ultimate “justification.” That is why they adulate Trump, whose worship of power thrills them by offering a release from the strained posture of trying to seem decent.
It seems to have escaped these “philosophers” that power justifies nothing. Only justice justifies.
And there is nothing that “conservatives” hate more than justice. Because if justice prevails, all of them will be exposed for the selfish cretins they actually are.