An Observation about the Political Right

First, my apologies for not writing as much as I once did. I've been working on a novel for the past several months. Without further delay...


Over the course of the last couple of years, I’ve had a chance to meet and observe a vast multitude of people who self-identify as “Conservative” or some other similar label. Simultaneously, it never ceases to amaze me the disparity that exists between the opinions of such people. These disparities range from differing spectral positions on a single issue all the way to diametrically opposing positions on the same issue.

While wading through the thick, verdant swamps of American political life, the impression gradually was made upon me that within Conservatism there has emerged a two-tiered division of thought. Upon further investigation, I deduced that the tier one occupies depends greatly on what informs his/her political thinking. Talk radio and other such media and the individual Conservative’s adherence to it plays an enormous role in their placement on either the lower or upper tier and thus figures heavily into my analysis.

The lower tier consists of people whose opinions are wholly or mostly dependent on many years of listening to talk radio. The opinions expressed and talking points employed by these rarely stray from those approved by their favorite host(s). In the rare event that they do stray, their reasoning for doing so usually isn’t solid enough to withstand the unrelenting opposition from the established talkers whose assiduous admonitions are intended to bring the aberrant soul back into line. For a more concrete example, these are people who, because their positions aren’t driven by an overarching philosophy but by a vague awareness of where they “should” stand on one issue or another, show up at conventions, usually running for some position, and describe themselves to assembled congregation as “pro-life, pro-gun, anti-tax” and soforth. We’ve all heard people like this whose stump speeches are about as unmemorable and uninspiring as a cow pie in a sprawling pasture because of the immaturity of thought driving their speech (more on this later). We’ve also seen how such people tend to be promptly and soundly vanquished by those from the upper tier whose maturity of thought cause their positions to flow from a single source, a broad and overarching philosophy, enabling them to produce creative, memorable, inspiring, and attention-drawing addresses.

Contrasting with the lower tier is the upper tier to which you were briefly introduced in the preceding paragraph. The upper tier consists of those whose brand of Conservatism is largely independent of talk radio, freeing their minds to engage more avant garde topics as national sovereignty, complete removal of government purview from the institution of marriage, dismantling the government police state, abolishing the public education system as we know it today, challenging the legitimacy of the Federal Reserve System or the Internal Revenue Service, and making the everyday connections allowing them to recognize the more subtle ways government interferes with society and purchases opinions with that interference, going so far as convincing people that these interferences are “needed”, something I personally hear from many mislabeled “Conservatives”. Because the upper tier has advanced in its political maturation to attain a higher level of thinking, talk radio for these lacks the influence it has with the lower tier. In fact, the upper tier hardly feels engaged by talk radio, frequently finding it boring, disappointing, or frustrating by its failure to go far enough, avoiding the desired destinations of the more mature mind.

So, where does that leave talk radio? Indeed, it’s difficult to seemingly critique so harshly what has arisen as a potent driving force in American politics and society in the last three decades and still want it around. It’s not that I dislike talk radio in and of itself; I dislike how it’s often presented as the first and last word on Conservatism and the sole guardian and representative of said doctrine. I wouldn’t get rid of it, but would prefer to see a change of focus following an acknowledgement of what it does. Talk radio, in its current form, is a great introduction to the Conservative Movement for those unfamiliar with it, taking large and very complex abstractions and breaking them down or watering them down into manageable pieces for those unable to consume larger ideas whole, feeding the political babies a sort of political baby food as it were. However, for those who have been in the movement for years, this wreaks havoc, doing little to advance their development because the analogous solid food isn’t being fed them. Seriously, when did you last hear Limbaugh or Hannity discuss negative rights, positive rights, the differences between the two, and why it matters? I never have either and that’s bad for the lower tier, always kept in the lower tier and intellectually dependent the way welfare recipients are kept in their particular lower tier and economically dependent.

What’s my solution? A two-pronged system should be employed in talk radio and across the Conservative Movement as a whole, one to bring in new people to the lower tier and another to raise from the lower tier to the upper tier when the time comes, if only more were willing to offer something to actually raise to the absolutely solid upper tier those from the ineffective lower tier, whose disastrous policy demands have caused the Republican Party so much grief the last several years. Then again, the lower tier must also desire advancement. If the lower tier is so lacking in intellectual curiosity, so deficient in individual initiative that they won’t come on their own, then Limbaugh and company need to dig deeper and do the serious teaching needed by the captive audience, though less entertaining and thus beneficial for their shows, these facts belying the depth to which our society has truly fallen. If my solution were to be implemented, the result will be a more unified voice with thinking based on mature ideas and philosophy that will win the day.

-Matt Rothchild