I was thinking about what to write today when I opened a recently purchased package of Fig Newtons (ambrosia on a tough day). As you can see in the picture, one of the cookies came packaged 'incorrectly' (or was it correct and the rest flawed?). I figured I'd write a short post on the virtues of maintaining individuality.
"I am a conservative." This, for me, you, and many others, is both a political and personal statement, a mold to conform to. I do this because I just happen to have the cooresponding experiences relating to the streamlined beliefs of the movement. However, while we do conform, we have to maintain our individuality.
Lucky for us, our movement emphasizes the individual and family as the bedrock of a good society. I have a fear that there are those that would wish to change this fundamental fact in the name of regimentation for political accomplishment and expediency.
We need to stay away from that height of collectivism. Earlier this week, I received a failing grade on a 10-page paper merely because of a"bad thesis/argument." What was bad? I directly refuted the professor's talking points and, BAM, was hit with a poor grade.
But life is much, much more than just grades. The grading system itself destroys individuality in a system of mandated conformity through requirements that force all to jump through the same hoops. As I've told all the crazy libs here at the less-than-excellent Grand Valley State: the only thing I've learned at college is to be more conservative...and that is why I, like Mark Twain, have never let teaching get in the way of my education.
It's all part of offering , as Goldwater said, a choice, not an echo. We arent the rigid collectivist/suppressionist party: we're dynamic, individual, and ingenuine. Unlike the liberals and their porkulus package Obama signed today, our ideas have risen out of the collectivist swamp of the New Deal and transcended Keynesian economics altogether. Why is this?
It's because of you! Not because of our leaders, not because of executives or your boss, not because of me sitting here behind my computer tucked away in collegiate corner of the world, but because of the people like you that are out there, every day, making this country happen. It's important that you realize it. You might look up at the stars, or witness grand political struggles, and think youre small and insignificant, but you must understand that the Cross of a thousand generations, the hopes and dreams of billions yet unborn, rests upon you.
Act worthy.
Posts
2 comments:
First of all.. Cool fig newton pic.
Interesting philosophical essay. As you suggest there is more to life than grades, which is proven time and again by "C" students who turn out to be our best producers. But the goals we set (As, Bs, Passing) will create a mindset which will drive our actions, and in some cases require that we seek alternate routes to the end game. They still serve a valuable purpose.
Collectivism is embraced by liberals, and as it tends to interlock it makes it tougher for newer and better (more correct) ideas to enter their consciousness. It has the ability to allow a single strain of poison spread to all the other parts with little resistance too often.
However, because it has its bad side, we cannot underestimate the power of collectivist activity which can help us overcome a rigid liberal hive mind. Conservatives still need to group, and share information and resources, yet respect the individual attitudes and ideas which come alongside our primary belief sets. Without SOME bond, on our core beliefs however we can be blown away like so much dust in a wind.
When youre talking about the liberal consciousness, are you speaking of their collective consciousness or each individual collectivists' ideology? I believe the phenomenon of the Reagan Democrats would shine some light on the presented idea, but I need more clarification lol.
I do have to refute the idea that conservatives need a 'group.' First off, this 'group' should be and is the Church and its set of moral principles, but the radical and vociferous preachers running the Party from the pulpit seem to do naught but harm.
Second, I see that, historically, Conservatism has needed little by means of 'ideological' bonding as an origin of political motivation, but more by means of pluralistic motivation (The Party, Heritage Foundation, social networking, legis. caucuses). This comes produced by great individuals like Goldwater, Reagan, Newt, Rush, Sean, etc., that inspire and drive the movement to get together and Get Out The Vote like in 80/84, 2000/04 with a minor example of Palin's effect in 08. Perhaps we cling to our guns and Bibles and then carry them with us to follow a true leader...
While I see your statement of "some bond" as naturally correct, it is politically impossible to maintain a certain measure of bond, a fact that still allows the expedient change mentioned in the post.
What do you think?
Post a Comment