Chang!

Okay, I made a little progress on my MA proposal so I'm taking a break to post about...Jeb Bush's mystical power of Chang.

From thinkprogress.org via DailyKos:

Chang is a mystical warrior. Chang is somebody who believes in conservative principles, believes in entrepreneurial capitalism, believes in moral values that underpin a free society.

I rely on Chang with great regularity in my public life. He has been by my side and sometimes I let him down. But Chang, this mystical warrior, has never let me down.

So...I don't know what to think about this. I'm not against people having mystical warriors or other protectors on their side. I think that's nice. However, I'm not sure that a mystical warrior would believe in conservative principles...do you? Don't mystical warriors and other sources of immense intangible power tend to enforce principles like honour, truth, justice, strength and other such values? Conservative principles are not very egalitarian. When people talk about mystical warriors, usually non-egalitarian principles like selfishness and avarice are looked down upon. So...I think Jeb Bush is a slightly deluded, not because he believes in a mystical force but because he believes that his mystical force will help him deny people their rights and reduce equality.

On a side note, traditionally conservatives support laissez-faire principles in economics and public life. Laissez-faire means you let the chips fall where they may. It really applies to the market, meaning if we don't interfere in the market, things will balance out. If there is a lot of a product, at first the price will be cheap, but eventually it will rise to its market price thus stemming the demand. Fewer people will want to buy it at a higher price and eventually producers will produce the right amount at that "market price" to satisfy demand. In public life it tends to mean that you mind your own business. You reduce state interference in private life. So, you wouldn't really care about what people are doing in their own private bedrooms, for example. As we all know, conservatives are extremely concerned with private life. They legislate against things like gay marriage, abortion, stem cell research, etc. However you feel about these things, legislating against them conflicts with the idea that you reduce the size of the state, which is a fundamental conservative principle. So, modern conservatives, especially those they call neo-conservatives, are not really following conservative principles. You know what they are following? Fascist principles. Totalitarian principles. Totalitarians try to control every aspect of life, public and private. So, when they call someone a neo-con, what they really mean is someone who supports BUSINESS doing what it wants but for you, the citizens to whom the government is bound, in your private life you should do what THEY want. Just thought I'd let you know.