Under a “Liberal” White House, the only dissident voices are “Conservative”; under a “Conservative” White House, the only dissident voices are “Liberal”… which is the result of the adolescent impulse of “loyalty” inherent to the football-team model of Politics (just one moment of rational reflection should lead us to consider the improbability of the “Democrats” always being right and the “Republicans” always being wrong, and vice versa). But it gets worse: the “Liberal” dissidence under Bush, I noticed, was much, much quieter than the “Conservative” dissidence under Obama.
When I was a kid, the loudest voices against LBJ (Dem) and Nixon (Rep) were Left-Leaning Radicals critiquing/resisting Imperial Power.
Why is the “Right” doing the “Left’s” job for it, now? When did things change?
And why have we seemingly abandoned all rational thought/ intellectual analysis in favor of being led by our Immediate Emotional Responses, which are, invariably, the easiest means through which to manipulate us?
Hubris is the obvious downfall of the Left, which only, now, functions as a reactionary appendage to the Right… a vestigial organ of balance. This is what exasperates me. The triumph of the Right (as reflected in the overwhelmingly dominant values of Authoritarianism/ Racial Essentialism// Materialism/ Gender Hierarchy/ Militarism and so forth; name not one “freedom” but a restriction on freedom that’s inarguably Left in nature) is so total that it’s barely noticeable (the “how fish thinks of water” paradigm) and it’s not a question of “if” but “how”: how do they maintain this control so utterly unopposed? And it’s very much like asking how two conservative, upper-middle class parents can effectively control a few rebellious adolescents.