Perspective

The Anal Philosopher has been a busy beaver during the holiday break with some pensive posts.  This one particularly intrigued me.

Is it your sense, as it is mine, that far more people went from the Democrat Party to the Republican Party than vice versa? Let’s suppose for the sake of explanation that this is the case. Why is it the case? The cynic might say that growing old makes one insensitive to the concerns of others and that this makes the Republican Party more appealing. Another—in my opinion better—explanation is that age brings wisdom, perspective, realism, and moderation, and that these attributes fit better with the Republican Party than with the Democrat. As people age, they (1) come to see the complexity of social life; (2) form a more realistic view of human nature; (3) have a better grasp of the relation between past, present, and future; (4) give more weight to things like security and stability and less to liberty and experimentation; and (5) think rather than feel. The Republican Party is the party of the mature and the responsible.

Do more people morph from Democrat to Republican - or liberal to conservative?  I do not know.

I do know that one reason I wished to attend college at the University of Wisconsin in Madison was that I believed it to be a large, liberal college. 

Indeed it was ... but, as I progressed from freshman to senior, I learned that "liberal" wasn't always what I thought it would be.  At the start of the '70s, when I came to Madison, not only was the Vietnam war raging, at home the battle over whether we should continue was at its height.  The summer of my first year, a student was killed because of a bombing on campus in a Physics building.

I saw students who legitimately and earnestly wished to protest the war ... but I also saw people who used Vietnam as an excuse to destroy property, drink beer and get wasted on drugs.

I learned that just because someone thought that they were a liberal, didn't mean that they were tolerant of the views of others and willing to support free speech for everyone.

Yes, Keith - I would agree that too many liberals deserve the moniker "bleeding hearts."  They want to help and give, but are unwilling to look at the big picture.  Too often, what they perceive to be "help to the underdog" is aid to keep the underdog in a hole.  Many liberals I know have no concept of the old adage "Give a man a fish, and he can eat for a day.  Teach a man to fish, and he can eat for a lifetime."

Though I thought I was a liberal when I was younger, I found that my values, beliefs and actions varied from many of those who called themselves "liberals."

Are they the "real" liberals?  Are people like me, and Roger Simon and Michael Totten and Dean Esmay, people who used to think that they were liberals, but cannot countenance the so-called liberal views of 2004 the real liberals? 

I don't know.

Personally, the labels don't interest me too much. 

But the questions and concepts that Keith raised on these issues - that is another story! 

If you have your own thoughts on these topics - feel free to comment here, or, as Keith requested, send your liberal/conservative experiences to the Anal Philosopher!

Comments

[Dean]

Peg, I love the picture!

[Van Helsing]

There is no doubt that the Republicans are the grown-up party. When some 35-yr-old adolescent draped in gold chains starts a "Vote or Die" campaign on MTV, he means "Vote Democratic or Die" -- and fortunately most of the people he's talking to aren't old enough to vote. Fortunately being a grown-up doesn't mean you can't have any fun!