I am interested in a topic and would appreciate engaging in a genuine discussion with individuals who align with conservative views regarding the current prevalent anger and resentment among them. I am trying to grasp the reasons behind why individuals who self-identify as "conservative" nowadays exhibit such strong emotions. I can understand why someone economically disadvantaged, residing in a rural area with limited education and resources, might feel discontent. It can be deeply frustrating to feel overlooked, disregarded, or excluded if this is indeed the underlying issue. However, for individuals who have successful careers, higher education, retirement plans, assets, secondary residences, multiple vehicles, occasional household assistance, and financial stability—what is fueling this anger?
This anger seems particularly perplexing when considering the apparent contradictions in conservative values. While many conservatives champion individual liberty, they often support policies that seem to repress women, racial minorities, and LGBTQ individuals. These days, they are taking particular aim at transgender people and single, childless women. To what possible end?
Take, for instance, the issue of marriage equality. Some conservatives seek to outlaw my marriage and support laws that permit discrimination against me simply because I am married to someone of the same gender. They criticize those of us without children or who don’t share their religious beliefs and seek to deny me the same rights and privileges of citizenship they enjoy.
Religious freedom presents a multitude of conflicting issues. It is perplexing to witness a party promoting "individual freedom" while pushing for the enforcement of "Judeo-Christian" values in society, essentially equating to "white Christian nationalism." Despite being a Catholic for nearly three decades and a lifelong Methodist before that, I find myself questioning whether I meet certain criteria to be considered a 'true' Christian. Who has the authority to make such determinations? Certainly not the government. Nevertheless, looking at various policy objectives, particularly those in the Heritage Foundation's 2025 Mandate for Leadership, it seems that the Right aims to intertwine religion and state affairs. What if someone who attends a public school, for example, follows a different faith such as Buddhism, Islam, Zoroastrianism, Deism, Transcendentalism, or Hinduism? Are their beliefs regarded as less valid? Or is it about perceived "American" values? Furthermore, what basis do individuals on the Right have to argue that those without religious beliefs are less deserving of respect and constitutional rights compared to self-professed Christians?
It makes me wonder whether the words of George Washington himself are not enough for those on the Right who profess to be "Constitutionalists:"
George Washington, in a letter to the United Baptist Churches in Virginia in 1789, Washington stated:
"Every man conducting himself as a good citizen, and being accountable to God alone for his religious opinions, ought to be protected in worshiping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience."
This raises a broader question regarding identity and inclusion: who qualifies as a "true" American? Can women be considered genuine Americans if they opt not to start families or marry? By what authority does the Right determine who qualifies as a "true" American? My paternal great-grandfather immigrated from England, and my maternal ancestors fought in the Revolutionary War. Does that make them any "real" Americans over someone who, say, was born here with a silver spoon and never served in our military? And what about individuals escaping violence from the south, pursuing the same freedoms we hold dear?
Is Lady Liberty truly a beacon of hope and freedom for all, or does her symbolism falter when those seeking her promises have skin tones darker than white? Some argue that she is to blame for supposedly "corrupting the spirit" of America. Are the escalating gas prices and the expense of bacon the root causes of discontent, or is it the inclusion of individuals of diverse ethnic backgrounds striving for equal freedoms? Furthermore, how about those who place emphasis on environmental issues and climate change? Should they not also be granted the same rights and safeguards of citizenship that the Right claims? It is as if the Right is fearful that their ideas cannot compete in the "free marketplace" of ideas these days.
This leads me to the values and principles that motivate the anger on the Right. What values and principles underlie the backing of a candidate like the former president or his vice presidential choice? Can you envision the uproar if a Democrat were found referring to veterans as "suckers" and "losers," running for re-election while being the only twice-impeached former President or accused of 34 felonies? The hypocrisy is glaring. Picture the demonstrations if a Democratic candidate showed disregard for women, bragged about grabbing women by the pu**y (a crime in all states and territories), or remained passive as a mob stormed the Capitol. The Right purports to champion law and order, yet this conduct goes against those principles.
While I am concerned about personalities, my main focus is on values. I must admit that I consider the former president's values completely opposed to everything good. However, what truly confounds me is his lack of basic decency and disregard for essential values. Now that I have made my stance clear, it is crucial that we steer the discussion away from personalities and towards principles. Ultimately, shouldn't values guide policies so that policies can be open to a logical debate based on facts and historical context? Critical issues such as the role and scope of the federal government, federalism, taxation, and social concerns need to be tackled. Instead of valid conservative challenges to ideas, I see crude and personal assaults. So, I pose the question once more: what core values are driving this anger? Could it be racism, homophobia, ethnocentrism, xenophobia, or misogyny?
To progress, shouldn't we redirect our focus and draw inspiration from the principles of the "conservative Judeo-Christian playbook," such as the “Golden Rule” and the “Greatest Commandment?” In this regard, while upholding the "Judeo" aspect of this argument, shouldn't those on the conservative side who uphold these values also practice basic hospitality towards strangers? Leviticus 19:34 states: "The stranger who resides with you shall be treated as one of your citizens; you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God."
Consider some libertarian principles traditionally associated with the political Right. For example, can we not agree that the government should refrain from interfering in personal matters, prioritize the safety of our communities and nation, and avoid excessive taxation while, at the same time, upholding religious diversity and guaranteeing freedom and liberty for everyone without oppressing others? Surely, we can walk and chew gum simultaneously because each individual's freedom is valuable as long as the exercise doesn't infringe on the rights of others.
I welcome conservatives to present a logical justification for their beliefs based on evidence. I am especially curious about the reasons behind conservatives' current support for Christian Nationalism. I am eager to comprehend what is causing such strong reactions from the "Right." Please explain your perspectives rationally without relying on exaggerated memes, as this could lead to a meaningful exchange of ideas. I am ready to listen.
Comments