The map is very red today, more so than it has been in many years. However, I don't think it's because America suddenly went back to conservatism. Instead, I think that the democrat/liberal strategy of instilling distrust toward authorities in the West, in order to argue that the democratic party is the party of change and people should, therefore, vote for them, is a monster that has grown out of their control.
Think about this for a moment. A lot of people didn't vote at all because they distrust the whole system now. These are the same people who tend to buy into every conspiracy theory that comes down the road. They just don't trust any authority anymore. They trust themselves. They trust their little groups. But they do not trust actual authorities. They tend to believe everyone is lying to them. It's a paranoid disposition toward authority in general that rules their thought processes.
Hence, many did not vote. So what we could be seeing with that map is that the country is far more liberal than it used to be. Conservatives are where liberals were in the seventies on a few issues. Liberals have grown radically liberal. Think of millennials. The little seed of distrust instilled in their parents has become a radical, almost certifiable, distrust in authority and the government. The media and university that sought to gain control of them by injecting them with such radical distrust has now lost control of them because they no longer trust them either.
This is displayed as well in our culture with people's distrust of the church and its authority. Self reigns supreme, as though it were a reliable authority at all, and those who have a little trust left in authority rule the world.
To push your analysis further, I'd suggest that liberal democracy itself is part of the problem, in that we have a system whose central guiding value is not what is good, true or wise, as decided by wise authorities, but simply valueless individual choice. For me, this is why conservatives become more liberal - our very system's nature pushes in such a direction in its strange mix of 'perpetual revolution and arbitrary authority,' as Seraphim Rose put it in his excellent short book 'Nihilism'.
ReplyDeleteBut I must say, I do think there are good grounds for distrust and even certain 'conspiracy theories'. Have you heard of Carroll Quigley, Bill Clinton's former teacher at Georgetown? He was a sympathetic insider to the international banking establishment, who do seem to effectively run the world in hair-raising ways. Joe Plummer wrote a good abridgment of Quigley's key work called 'Tragedy and Hope 101' which you can find for free on Plummer's website, if that would be of interest.
But I wonder beyond that if there are theological reasons for such trust. If rulers don't obey Psalm 2, can we ever fully trust them or their intentions? We are obligated to obey and pay taxes to Caesar, and God may indeed graciously use him for good, but I don't think it's wrong to be aware of how he is being used for great evil as well - not that I'm suggesting you're unaware of this, of course.
Just a few thoughts there. It's been quite a spectacle from this side of the Atlantic...
I agree. I think distrust in some authorities is a good thing, but it seems that the pattern now is to distrust all authority, even people who are experts in something. So there is a distrust of doctors, but a trust in the friend down the street selling oils. There is a distrust in NASA, but a trust in the good ol boy on youtube saying that the earth is flat. There is a distrust in scholars, but a trust in conspiracy theorists who have little scholarly training. The very professors and media who instilled this distrust in so many are now distrusted themselves because everyone is suspicious of everyone, except, perhaps, their own friends and little groups.
ReplyDeleteI don't think I would give an uncritical trust to government or the media or professors either, but there seems to be a movement now to disregard authorities in favor of laymen who are seen as more authentic. This may also explain Trump's win among those who did vote.