A further response to Yglesias

Commenting here on Matthew Yglesias’ frustrating predilection for making in-accurate, un-fair characterizations about conservatives, generalizations based on his (justifiable) contempt for a particular (and, regrettably, power-ful) segment that happens, rightly or wrongly, to pass as part of conservatism, rather than being recognized as what it is, videlicet, Wilsonian conservative-liberal statism (Help, some-one! Deconstruct that for me!), I failed to remark on the ostensibly, rather than actually, salient point of his piece, to wit, that

what many fail to realize is that 9/11 made environmental regulations obsolete as well:

The Supreme Court, in a decision 15 months ago that startled the government, ordered the EPA to decide whether human health and welfare are being harmed by greenhouse gas pollution from cars, power plants and other sources, or to provide a good explanation for not doing so.

The administration, naturally, decided to comply with the court order “opted to postpone action instead, according to interviews and documents obtained by The Washington Post.” Ah, opted to postpone. And how does that work?

To deny that the GOP and main-stream conservatives (Or, more appropriately, “conservatives”?) have tended not to give a damn about the environment, at least relative to other concerns (exempli gratia, Wilsonian exportation of democratic capitalism, as they call it) would be to engage in disingenuousness tantamount to that so frequently practiced by Matthew. How-ever, just as that espousing conservatism implies supporting torture or rejecting the rule of law, as Yglesias, absurdly, contends, is patently false, so, too, is the notion that being conservative requires — or even permits — reckless dis-regard for the environment wholly fallacious. In many of us exists an immanent concern for Creation, a concern that informs no insignificant amount of what we profess; I wish, then, here, to post again a comment from Kirk, in The Conservative Mind, which I originally posted in October.

“The modern spectacle of vanished forests and eroded lands, wasted petroleum and ruthless mining, national debts recklessly increased until they are repudiated, and continual revision of positive law, is evidence of what an age without veneration does to itself and its successors.”

Please, Matthew, give us a break. Some-one posting humbly under the free, generic banner of a WordPress web-log, as I do, might be able to get away with playing so loosely with the truth (although he shouldn’t); some-one under the banner of as renowned and respectable a publication as the Atlantic Monthly owes to him-self, to the good name of that journal, to his peers and supervisors, and to his readers to write more sincerely.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: