Sunday, April 06, 2008


This started out as a comment to a previous comment on Huckleberries online, a blog sponsored by the Spokesman-Review and mentored by Dave Olivarria. My post is in answer to a comment by a person that uses the on-line name of Idawa, which seems to suggest that he can't make up his mind where he is, Washington State, or Idaho, but then that's alright. He then attempted to define a conservative, which I thought he did rather well. Here is my response:

Well, Idawa, one thing you said resonated with me.

"one who embraces tradition and urges gradual change"

It is interesting though, that most definitions of liberal/conservatives are made by the other group, leaving both liberals and conservatives to be defined by someone that disagrees with their philosophy. It would be a freshening breeze, if we were allowed to define ourselves. I see nothing wrong, however with Idawa's definition of a conservative. When one gets into differing degrees is where the rubber hits the road.

I also see nothing wrong with the above definition insofar as being cautious and promoting gradual change seems to be a virtue opposed to an objection. Change in a social or governmental sense is alright, as long as it isn't sudden and all encompassing without the cushion of history and tradition to keep things from blowing out of hand. That, of course is well covered in our constitution, which was worded very carefully, so that radicals couldn't set this country ablaze with a will-of-the-wisp temporary aberration. One hopes that this buffer will long endure.

No comments: