Posted by
JDComments on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 2:57:17 PM
I usually agree with Bill O'Reilly, though his populist tirade against the Oil Companies must have been written by Nancy Pelosi's speechwriter, but I have a bone to pick with him regarding his new book "Culture Warrior". Try as I might, I cannot figure out the real differences between his Traditionalists and Secular-Progressives and good old fashioned Conservatives and Liberals. Yes, he tries to finesse this, and creates some minor points of divergence, but let's be real, or in his terms, cut out the spin.
All Liberals are secular , regardless of what superficial homage they might pay to religion [especially recently] and there is a fundamental reason for this: acceptance of God implies there are Absolutes in the Universe, specifically in terms of morality and ethics, and this is anathema to a Liberal, who is raised on the mother's milk of multiculturalism and moral relativism, and who cannot abide by the thought that there exists a Higher Power who can restrain their effort to create a better world. Hence they take every opportunity to restrict religion in the public square, while waving the banner of Darwinism in their crusade against believers, who stand in the way of their perfecting Man. And this clever segue leads to the other basic tenet of Liberalism, progress, which they believe is ever onward, a march Marx took straight to a Communist heaven. Therefore, all Liberals are secular progressives [progressive and liberal are often used synonymously].
As for Conservatives, they are, by definition, those who seek to conserve the traditional ways of doing things which they feel time and man's collective intelligence have proved work. A Conservative is ALWAYS a traditionalist, something that should not have to be pointed out, especially to someone as savvy as O'Reilly.
So every time I hear Mr.O'Reilly use his new terms, what comes to mind is the person who renamed used cars as "pre-owned", a brilliant marketing ploy which really just repackaged old clunkers and allowed them to become respectable. O'Reilly never has referred to himself as Conservative [at least I have never heard him], yet has no trouble calling himself a Traditionalist. Fine, if this is just an attempt at coloration which allows him to maintain some semblance of neutrality on his show, more power to him. If, on the other hand, he is trying to create a new proprietary demarcation between people which he can claim as his discovery, well, if he tried to patent it , I think it would be rejected as just restating what has existed for hundreds of years. There is a Culture War, and I respect O'Reilly for engaging it, but in the spirit of honesty and reality, let's call a Liberal a Liberal . And if there is anyone out there who can show me the error of my ways, please, feel free to explain what I am missing, and why we need new terms for old foes.