Conservative Movement Is No More

After years of research and meditation, "The Conservative Mind," by Russell Kirk, became my political bible; 'Moral Relativism' divides the necessary marriage of accountability from responsibility, and 'Situational Ethics' destroys any chance at Codified control (not to mention its denial to the obvious Human Condition). These findings, and others, helped solidify my field of political possibilities into a more practical model. Further, after much spiritual turmoil, I arrived at –at least- a very firm believe in the spirituality of Man. With this as my base (litmus test) I then came to the conclusion that the most important of the two: body (the physical world), and soul (the spiritual world), that soul is the superior element. With these significant parameters as my foundation, natural progression logically brought me to a conservative political outlook.
I believe absolute equality exists among all people. And, since it exists, I needn’t (re)construct it, but seek it –strive for it-- for myself, with a natural duty to help others do the same. I believe in the wisdom of Judeo/Christian values and I so fully appreciate the Concept of Sovereignty, which one cannot ignore if one believes in the possibility of metaphysical transcendence as well as in inalienable rights. Again, this is conservatism. I also trust most level headed, western-influenced people would believe similarly if they had the desire to gain the necessary knowledge. But, unfortunately, the socio perception of conservatism continues to evolve into a less and less attractive package for the lack of understanding among its followers, as well as among its elected torchbearers.
I served in the Marine Corps under the late great President Reagan, coming of age –-to turn a phrase— politically and morally during that time-frame. But family and socio/politico concerns became a priority and I got out in December 0f 1988. I remained an at-home family man for 17 years. But then, at 50 years of age, I again heard the call of patriotism; joined the Guard to ship out to Iraq with the 756th Transportation Company. You see, I believe in living my belief; that too is conservatism.
With that said, I am growing weary of the Good Fight.
True conservatism has disappeared from our understanding, evidenced by its’ elected torchbearers. I was concerned when Mr. George H. Bush held that label. Then I became alarmed when Mr. George W. Bush became the new leader. And now, with Mr. McCain as the new holder of the torch, I am forced to accept original conservatism no longer meaningfully exists; the Tocqueville warning is now reality. No longer do I hear anyone speaking of our constitutionally guaranteed republican form of government; today its all about spreading (direct) democracy. No one in government, no one in our institutions of higher learning –not even the self-appointed talking heads-- speaks of how we the people are surrounded by a republican bubble, protected from our LIMITED democratic institutions. Mark Levin got close to the issue in, “Men In Black,” in his Epilogue, only to digress to a mere “democratic republic”* in his Afterword. Mr. Novak got real close in, “On Two Wings,” and even Michael Savage ran circles around it in his “The Savage Nation,” but still, no comparative narrations furthering its’ distinctive characteristics.
Freedoms have completely replaced liberties; (distinguishing the two makes an excellent “teaching moment," and discussing freedoms-under-our-democratic-process vs. liberty-under-the-vail-of-our-republic really gets to the meat of the problem). Privileges now overshadow rights (another excellent issue to help distinguish democratic and republican forms of government), but no longer are these issues discussed in the public forum.
Inalienable rights are gone, either by hook or by crook,** as we continue “evolutionizing” positive law by integrating it with contract law precepts. Natural Law is nothing more than museum-esc amusement to academia. Inalienable rights, and the ensuing concept of delegation of authority from a Higher Power (relative sovereignty), IS the basis for our constitutional republic. But it becomes moot and unusable when such idealisms are no longer within the minds and hearts of the People.

"Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it…While it lies there, it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it." -Learned Hand, jurist

Without the people having at least a hint of what real Liberty means; without the people (and our courts) understanding that responsibility and accountability are inseparable twins; with the concept of republicanism moot, and the importance of rights trumping privileges, all gone from the public-at-large sector, conservatism is left with no backbone. The nerves have all dried up and the brain has no way of telling the arms and feet how to move or where to go.
Our apparent willingness to compromise on who gets our vote is also a clear symptom that society is similarly infected. If we are willing to make a voting decision by first determining who is the most evil (off path), then thus, voting for the other remaining candidate, we are then guilty of moral relativism and no longer governed by conservative precepts. Political affiliation within the democratic process becomes all-consuming and we brush off any idealisms of seeking the individual. Is a little evil better than more evil? I believe right is right and wrong is wrong. Yes, there are degrees of right and wrong, but there is always an exacting fulcrum if we would only look. Worker’s unions, insurance protections, disclaimers, customized drugs, voting to affect our paycheck, trading safety for liberty, and 26 ways to file for various degrees of bankruptcy: all symptoms and enablers of passing responsibility along to the goblins They are sharp nails in the coffin awaiting conservatism.
I am reminded of the words of John Adams when he was approached one Easter morning by a “political writer.” The writer asked then-Congressman Adams why he toiled so over fighting slavery when that one issue threatened to destroy his final attempt at public service. Mr. Adams answered in part, “Duty is ours, results are God’s.” We have a duty to vote our conscience, not to compromise it.
Notes:
* My use of the phrase, "by hook or by crook" signifies two of the ways free people are pulled out of our republican sphere and into the public (democratic) sphere, thereby accountable under our institutional system: hook is by contract, and crook insinuates an action causing injury.
** Phrases such as democratic republic, constitutional democracy, and others, are serious pitfalls showing a laziness with our use of English. As such phrases continue in use, the masses slowly absorb the individual words concurrent with their singular, generic definitions. Over time the generic collective understanding of the phrase is then reflected back into what we were originally trying to identify. Thus, rather then the original entity being used as the identifier, the identifier becomes the phrase, modified to fit the name. This is the same process that causes languages to change over time (inverse modification), and it is one of the many causes of our drifting political idealisms. THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST EFFECTIVE TOOLS OF THE SECULARISTS! Correctly named, our intended system of government is a "constitutional republic." We are not a democracy (though one could say we are democratic in governmental construction). Our republic (public-at-large) has no government and transcends our constitutionally limited democratic process. It is only the man-made (public) sector of constitutionally subordinate institutions that are governed. (There are exceptions; it is contractual law precepts within civil and criminal law that allows for them to be binding. My use, above, of the phrase "by hook or by crook" describes such examples).