Flat White

Why do conservatives hold back?

16 June 2020

11:35 AM

16 June 2020

11:35 AM

Why do conservatives hold back? Why do they feel they are constrained from activism or speaking out? The left certainly appears to have no problem with constraining either their actions or their language.

Possibly it is in the conservative nature. To a large extent our institutions — marriage, faith, parliamentary democracy — and our collective past, help define who conservatives are and what we believe. We take comfort from them and a sense of where we fit in this world. We know they are not perfect and we are happy to work on improving them.

The left, on the other hand, just want to ‘burn it all down’ and start again, with no real plan for a better future — such as the Minneapolis City Council’s commitment to defund the police. The rioters just want something different now, with no real thought of the cost to others. Their plan is not based on any science or research, just on  “I reckon this would be good”. Achieving their aims by almost any means is acceptable to many of them.

This is why the left see conservatives as people stuck in the past, obstinate, and complacent. It is also why conservatives see the left as dangerous, selfish and totalitarian, people who will force their views down everyone’s throats.

The left understand that one person is different to the next in so many ways, but instead of accepting it and celebrating it, they seek to use it to divide us into smaller and smaller groups to demand special consideration for each group. It used to be about race, then male and female, then gay and straight – but now they realised you can be a gay, black and female which increases the number of various subsets exponentially. What if the gay, black female is old (that comes with biases) what if they are young (different biases but still bias). What about tall, short, ugly, attractive, disabled, active, catholic, protestant, atheist and so forth. This endless cycle of identity politics and reducing groups to smaller and smaller subsets has only one inevitable conclusion – the biggest minority is the minority of one. You and me, and everyone else.

British author and philosopher, C.S. Lewis once said:

The most dangerous thing you can do is to take any one impulse of your own nature and set it up as the thing you ought to follow at all costs. There is not one of them which will not make us into devils if we set it up as an absolute guide. You might think love of humanity in general was safe, but it is not. If you leave out justice you will find yourself breaking agreements and faking evidence in trials “for the sake of humanity,” and become in the end a cruel and treacherous man.”

This actually explains much about what is happening lately, with COVID 19 extended lockdowns, with the George Pell case. As much as we disagree with the views of Chairman Dan, the various members of the left-wing commentariat and the two members of Appeals Court who erred, we should at least acknowledge that most of them are acting on an “impulse” which they equate to being humane.

They believe that the most humane outcome for one person must be the most ‘just’. They just forget to temper this impulse with real justice for everyone involved — not just a small subset of society.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.


Show comments
Close