Kopp Column: Liberals Don’t Believe In Giants

show

If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.” –Isaac Newton

Newton noted his own contributions to science were made possible by studying, learning and knowing the works of those before him.  His sentiment is echoed by conservatives who study, learn and maintain the belief that moral order is not a progressive evolution, nor a situational moment.  Unlike progressives, conservatives know mankind is not progressing to a better and better condition.  Conservatives know to try to re-invent, re-categorize, re-systematize humans will not work. Note: (Not all liberals are progressive, but all progressives are liberal.  Progressives can be either Democrats or Republican.)

Russell Kirk wrote in one of his essays

“Conservatives argue that we are unlikely, we moderns, to make any brave new discoveries in morals or politics or taste. It is perilous to weigh every passing issue on the basis of private judgment and private rationality.   Order and justice and freedom, they believe, are the artificial products of a long social experience, the result of centuries of trial and reflection and sacrifice.”

Therefore, conservatives among all political classes are the most teachable.   (The corollary to this is that if you’re not teachable, you’re probably not a conservative.) Those who ignore the lessons of giants of the past are egotistical, arrogant and unlearned.   C. S. Lewis called it “chronological snobbery,” valuing only the present era upholding it as the ultimate standard and possessor of truth.   This is the “feels good — do it” or the situational ethics crowd. Those guilty of chronological snobbery believe failed economic policies of the past will work this time.  They believe more money poured in to America’s education bureaucracy will eventually produce better and brighter results.  They believe redistributing wealth will work better now than it did for Hitler, Stalin or Khrushchev.  They believe the same fiscal policy that broke Greece and Spain will not happen here.

You don’t need to look to Russia or even modern day liberals to see the progressive agenda fail repeatedly as progressives (liberals, radicals) tried to revolutionize America. We saw it in the Free Love movement of the 60’s when people revolted against traditional morals and standards and conditions did not improve.   Unplanned pregnancies, abortion, a dramatic rise in STDs and even the spread of a new virus Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) were the result.  Free lovers, feminists and the Abbie Hoffmans and Jerry Rubins of the day failed to create a new age of freedom and equality.

Conservatives believe in order. They believe it is one of the historic lessons from the past that can be applied to today. The harder progressives try to set aside long-held standards, norms, morals, ethics, and values, the more chaos results and freedom is lost.  Situational ethics produces chaos not freedom. Conservatives abhor situational ethics.

Progressives attempt to mount a false argument that conservatives resist change, want to return to the horse and buggy days.  That’s a straw man argument.  They throw insults at conservatives saying that conservatives believe in keeping women barefoot and pregnant. (Tell that to some of the heroes of the modern conservative movement: Peggy Noonan, Dana Perino, Megyn Kelly, Ann Coulter or Nikki Haley.)

Conservatives do not resist change. They resist the effort to create new values, morals, ethics and standards that historically have failed or have cost an entire Empire such as Alexander’s.   True conservatives embrace different subcultures but stick to conservative truths of property rights, Constitutional foundations, human rights, and the pursuit of classless societies.  True conservatives know from what they’ve learned while standing on giant’s shoulders that a society must maintain those things that are true, noble, right, pure, lovely, admirable, excellent and praiseworthy.  There is no progressing past that.

Mike Kopp has exercised his political muscle as a media director to two statewide campaigns, a television political reporter, a lobbyist, and staff assistant to the Senate Majority Leader. He is currently a communications contractor working from his home in Wilton, ND.

Related posts

  • tomorrowclear

    None of you are remotely close to Russell Kirk or traditional conservatives. None of those folks worshiped at the altar of the Holy Free Market.

    Just to clarify, pursuit of “classless societies” would indeed be a change in long-term norms and values. I would welcome such an effort from conservatives, but can you provide an example of modern conservatives pursuing this?

    BTW, would you say that the pursuit of immediate equality of blacks in the early to mid-20th century represented “radical change?” After you respond, I will provide the correct answer.

    • Roy_Bean

      …BTW, would you say that the pursuit of immediate equality of blacks in
      the early to mid-20th century represented “radical change?”…

      No, I would say that that was what the founders of the anti-slavery Republican party wanted 100 years earlier. The main opposition to that was from the likes of Robert (KKK) Byrd and his fellow democrats.

      • mickey_moussaoui

        Spot on Roy. But as we already know, liberals are weak on history and select to redefine it at will with an emotional self serving twist

      • tomorrowclear

        They were called the “Radical” Republicans, you blithering idiot. They represented radical change.

        You don’t even make it challenging. A bunch of half-literate, anti-intellectual, knuckle-draggers. No wonder so many of you imbeciles profess your hostility to education so often; You were the malcontents in class, not paying attention. Particularly in history class.

        • Roy_Bean

          The Radical Republicans demanded civil rights for freed slaves such as the right to vote. They were opposed by the democrats. Republican President U.S. Grant signed the Civil Rights Act of 1871 which was used to combat the KKK. That law was opposed by the democrats. If freedom and equality represent radical change then I’m happy to have the likes of you call me a “blithering idiot” and I’ll wear the name proudly.

  • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

    More sanctimonious crap, Mike?
    You’re hilarious!

    • sbark

      so as a liberal…….which of these dont you like?………….property rights, Constitutional foundations, human rights, and the pursuit of classless societies

      I suppose all of the above as shown by leftwing actions thru the last 100 plus yrs.

      “To become the master, the politician pretends to be the servant.”–De Gaulle

      • mickey_moussaoui

        The more you study liberals, the more they seem like a wrecking crew, dismantling civilization bit by bit — replacing what works with what sounds good.

        • sbark

          The ave joe on the left reacts on emotions, or the pretense of emotions as with the gun control push now………but the end results are always a bigger mess.
          Problem is, right now the radical element of the Dem’cat party knows full well what the end goals are—they are coldly calculating the end result—the ave joes are being used like Sandra Fluke on party nite.

  • sbark

    You’ll get more disagreement here from Big L’s than from left wing liberals……..

  • Az

    Wow, way to cherry pick. Pick up a couple struggling progressive states and pretend nothing else exists. Scandavia, Iceland, Germany, Canada, etc. are all much more progressive than the US and have higher incomes, are generally happier and healthier as well. Moreover, using the classic definition of conservative (hesitant to change and finding value in traditional values) you ignore the fact that many ultra-conservative are even more dysfunctional than the struggling progressive states you cite, e.g. Saudi Arabia, the Philippines, and if small government, high gun ownership, and individual freedom are conservative principles, Republicans should be flocking to Somalia.

    • Jl

      “More progressive and have higher incomes…” Does no good to have a “higher income” if a majority of it is then confiscated by taxes. Way to cherry pick.

      • Guest

        LOL SH*#THEAD. Your post is so profoundly stupid it’s hard to even respond. First, many of those countries do have higher incomes even if they pay higher taxes. Second, for some of those countries, there tax rates are lower or at least comparable to the tax structure of the United States. Third, even if they are taxed higher, they are provided services that would normally take a huge chunk out of American income such free education and healthcare, so their actual buying power is greater even with higher taxes. Lastly, the point of the post was to guard against cherry picking by showing not all progressive countries are as bad off as Greece and some are doing quite well. You couldn’t even counter the fact that some conservative states are doing extremely poorly and thus failed to accomplish much of anything in your pathetic posts. Way to be a stupid sh*#thead, stupid sh*#tead.

        • Carl

          It seems hanni, Rob’s little pet troll is trying to be profoundly anonymous.

          • ellinas1

            Happy New Year, harpy.

          • Carl

            Happy New Year goat f*cker

          • ellinas1

            Harpy, Happy New Year.

          • two_amber_lamps

            Ellinas is like a pederast support group during the week of an anime convention…

            NO CLASS!

          • ellinas1

            Happy New Year, harpy.

            NO CLASS!

          • two_amber_lamps

            Naw… that’s the 7-11 savant… the “Big Suck” himself… aka “Guest.”

          • Guest

            What kind of pathetic life do you have that you’ve sat online posting uninspired insults all day?

          • lb

            Actually, you’re quite the inspiration for generating insults.

          • two_amber_lamps

            Oh, look… I realize coming up with a handle is difficult for a pea-brained imbecile so thought I’d help you with something so 7-11’esque since you spend all your time there pirating bandwidth from the starbucks across the street. You really should do your job but if your boss isn’t a good capitalist and crack the whip on you, that’s on him.

            I bid thee adieu “Big Suck!”

          • Guest

            Says willieb, who can’t quite even settle on any particular anonymous pseudonym.

          • Carl

            Who’s willieB? Are you talking to yourself using another of your sockpuppets?

  • Matthew Hawkins

    Here, let me write your next article.

    Blah, blah blah, liberals bad
    Blah, blah, blah, conservatives good.

    It is hilarious that you criticize strawman arguments when that is all you have.

    • camsaure

      Where is it you said that you practiced law?? Sheesh

      • Matthew Hawkins

        Where is it you said you had a job? Sheesh.

        • camsaure

          I didn’t you are a liar, and you lied again.

      • two_amber_lamps

        Dunno… find out where he lives and check the local lock-ups… (jailhouse lawyer anyone?)

    • Mike

      You got it! Glad you see the difference between conservatives and liberals.

      • Snarkie

        Your columns blow bro. I would stick to real hatchets and not political ones. Nice bio though. Goes to show that standards are goddamn low up there in the rent-seekin’ state of ND.

  • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

    You don’t have to be very tall to seem like a giant to a liberal. Occasionally they organize programs for the removal of heads in order to help correct the situation. Heads not only add height, but have faces which the most visible evidence of people being individuals. Get rid of the heads and the faces and you get the masses that liberals love.

  • camsaure

    Liberals don’t believe in giants, but they do believe in unicorns, sasquatch and money coming out of thin air or growing on trees.

    • two_amber_lamps

      They also believe the teachings of Marx will work this time…

  • Matthew Hawkins

    This is a nonpartisan comment, purely based on something I find amusing.

    Isaac Newton was an asshole, a notorious asshole It’s rumored that his mother didnt like him. But he was brilliant.

    Robert Hooke was also brilliant. Robert Hooke was a prince. Everybody loved him. He studied in some of the same fields as Isaac Newton.

    Back in the 16th and 17th century scientific attribution was much less accurate than now. Many historians believe that Newton outright stole some of the ideas of Hooke. Some scientific historians believe Robert Hooke was actually a better scientist.

    Despite being an asshole Isaac Newton marketed himself better than Hooke and that may be why he is more famous.

    Isaac Newton hated Robert Hooke.
    Robert Hooke hated Isaac Newtonl

    But the funny part is that Robert Hooke was short. About five foot tall.
    Isaac Newton’s comment about standing on the shoulders of giants was an insult to Robert Hooke’s height.

    ]Isaac Newton was smack talking. I kind of like him for that.

    • Snarkie

      You are correct about Newton’s comment. Newton was a douche and got into lots of priority battles, especially with Leibniz and Hooke.

      You would need to know history for that though, and conservatives pretend to know some… but they actually don’t. Two week memories is all. Bet your ass Mike read something about Newton yesterday.

  • Snarkie

    So who are the ‘giants’ that Newton is referring to, if indeed they were giants? Newton’s ‘giant’ comment was a dig at Hooke, who was a short guy. And if Newton is crediting those before him (mainly Arab scholars he was reading) then that means he wasn’t the giant that pop histories make him out to be.

Top