Another explanation is that blinded by rage at the Bush administration and resentment over its own lack of power, the left has betrayed its commitment to grasp the many-sidedness of politics, and, in the process, has lost appreciation of modern conservatism’s distinctive contribution to the defense of a good, liberty, which the left also prizes. Indeed, the widespread ignorance among the highly educated of the conservative tradition in America is appalling.
A thoughtful essay by Hoover Institution senior fellow Peter Berkowitz.
The left prides itself on, and frequently boasts of, its superior appreciation of the complexity and depth of moral and political life. But political debate in America today tells a different story.
On a variety of issues that currently divide the nation, those to the left of center seem to be converging, their ranks increasingly untroubled by debate or dissent, except on daily tactics and long-term strategy. Meanwhile, those to the right of center are engaged in an intense intra-party struggle to balance competing principles and goods.
One source of the divisions evident today is the tension in modern conservatism between its commitment to individual liberty, and its lively appreciation of the need to preserve the beliefs, practices, associations and institutions that form citizens capable of preserving liberty. The conservative reflex to resist change must often be overcome, because prudent change is necessary to defend liberty. Yet the tension within often compels conservatives to wrestle with the consequences of change more fully than progressives — for whom change itself is often seen as good, and change that contributes to the equalization of social conditions as a very important good.
To be sure, some standard-order issues remain easy for both sides. Democrats instinctively want to repeal the Bush tax cuts, establish government supervised universal healthcare, and impose greater regulation on trade. Just as instinctively Republicans wish to extend the Bush tax cuts, find market mechanisms to broaden health care coverage and reduce limitations on trade.
But on non-standard issues — involving dramatic changes in national security and foreign affairs, the power of medicine and technology to intervene at the early stages of life, and the social meaning of marriage and family, the partisans show a clear difference: the left is more and more of one mind while divisions on the right deepen.
Consider Iraq. The split among conservatives has widened since Saddam was toppled in the spring of 2003. Traditional realists continue to put their trust in containment, and reject nation-building on the grounds that we lack both a moral obligation and the requisite knowledge of Arabic, Iraqi culture and politics, and Islam. Supporters of the war still argue that, in an age of mega-terror, planting the seeds of liberty and democracy in the Muslim Middle East is a reasonable response to the poverty, illiteracy, authoritarianism, violence and religious fanaticism that plagues the region.
…
Left vs. Right - increasingly I think this traditional spectrum is too simplistic.
I agree with Berkowitz that some segments of the “Left” have simply lost the plot and with it any capacity for thinking rational discourse on many important issues (Iraq, Israel, radical Islamism to name the most prominent).The “Left” is supposed to be against hate but increasingly some comment form the Left is dripping with hate, and I agree with Berkowitz that some of them have allowed hate to blind them.
But he ignores the splits with the Left, and the many groups and commentators who have sought to stake out a political position more consistent with the truly liberal traditions of the Left.
For example:
Commentator Jeff Weintraub [his blog].
ENGAGE, a group formed in opposition to the (idiotic) proposed boycotts against Israeli academics.
The Euston Manifesto (I signed it).
Scholars for Peace in the Middle East
These groups and commentators are responding to the disillusionment and disenchantment many people who see themsleves as of the “Left” on many issues have felt with the way the political Left has gone in recent years. San Francisco Bay-Area commentator Keith Thompson wrote an essay a couple of years ago entitled “Leaving the Left” which resonated with me. He identifies a key turning point as the 2005 Iraqi election, which many “leftists” could not or would not applaud as a positive for the Iraqis, regardless of their position on the invasion of Iraq. I opposed that invasion and continue to consider it a colossal blunder, but could not help but be impressed and heartened by the turnout of Iraqis in their millions to vote.