Conservatism and fear of change = lack of personal power.
This is not romantic. This is a PROBLEM. Let’s address it.
Pills of wisdom #8
I’ll be super brief today. If you need explanations, feel free to leave a comment.
When I talk about “conservatism”, I’m not only referring to n*zi and @lt-r1ght people. (Yes I censor certain words because I don’t want the wrong kind of follower finding me through Google). Those groups are conservative, no doubt, but they aren’t the ONLY groups prone to conservatism.
I’m talking about a mindset, not an identity. The kind of conservatism I’m addressing here can happen in the left too and all over the political spectrum.
So, what I mean by “conservatism” is actually the most common dictionary meaning:
1 a: inclination to preserve what is established
Yes, even Merriam-Webster (where I took this from) acknowledges the identity politics now present in modern uses of the term, but let’s focus on the basic definition only for the sake of my point. A conservative mindset implies having [a usually unhealthy amount of] attachment to what is established; what “already is”; what “doesn’t need to be created or invented”. So, basically, it implies giving away your personal power for the sake of having the convenience of access to something that somebody else already used their personal power to create (at a given moment in History). That’s conservatism. It’s taking “surrender” to an unhealthy extreme. It’s lazy and entitled.
The above is why a lot of conservative people actually embrace tree-hugging ideologies and aren’t necessarily in favour of Capitalism. (Not that I am; Hi, fellow tree-hugger here! I’m just not conservative). People can’t see that, because they narrow-down the definition of “conservatism” too much. They think to be conservative is to be a suburban boomer who tells people to get off their lawn. Nope. That’s only a very small subset. Can you see that now? The sooner you realise that, the better. Don’t be fooled that only open-minded people want to “save the planet”. Conservatives can have the same exact objective — just through oppressive (or neglectful-with-their-human-neighbours) means.
Let’s look at some practical examples:
Example #1: AI
A lot of people are talking about AI now. If you look at open-minded people, their arguments mostly boil down to “how can we harness AI for good”. If you look at conservative people, they’re mostly talking about “how AI is evil and going to replace us all and make the world more unfair unless we stop it”.
I mean, sure, AI is making everybody a little nervous. It’s new, it represents a big unknown in many scenarios. It’s normal and human to feel nervous when you see the “new”. Conservatism is not just that. Conservatism is panicking too fucking much about it; being unable to see other perspectives; getting caught-up in the turmoil because, “oh no, this new thing is going to bring change, and I don’t want any change, I want things to stay as they are forever!” Can you see how it differs from normal unease? It goes beyond unease. It always brings a certain sense of entitlement (that things stay exactly and pedantically the same forever and ever. Not an inch out of place! A huge intolerance and inflexibility to the natural progression of life).
It’s not that open-minded people are “crazy” or inconsequential or irresponsible (or insert here your preferred piece of conservative condescending comment against them). Open-minded people go through the motions too, they worry about change too, they approach with caution the “new” like everybody else. They’re not seeing change as “always good and always welcome”. However, they don’t FIGHT OR RESIST change. They look at change and go like, “well, this is happening. [Insert here all stages of grief]. Okay, how can we live with it now?”. Conservative people, on the other hand, never leave the first stage of grief: denial. That’s why they’re objectively more unhealthy. Here’s the thing: nothing in the world is insurmountable. Nothing is impossible to face with a little creativity and resourcefulness. And nobody LACKS creativity or resourcefulness, at least a tiny bit. If you think you do, you’re wrong — you’re not lacking it, you’re just rejecting it; because it’s more comfortable to throw your hands up in the air in defeat, isn’t it? This attitude ensures you keep depending on authoritarian leaders stronger THAN you to take over your load of responsibility, just like a toddler waiting on mommy to cater to them. It’s giving away your personal power together with the “uncomfortable and not-very-fun” emotional labour you need to do in order to access this personal power (everything has two sides. You can’t just have the delicious and comfortable one, child. Let’s grow up a bit).
I won’t go into why some people embrace conservatism and have a harder time accepting change. That’s for mental health professionals to study and diagnose. I’m just an oracle. I’m just throwing the idea out there. On to the next example:
Example #2: Immigration in Europe.
(I live in Europe, hence the specific region, but apply this to your side of the world)
The fact is straightforward. Immigration into Europe has increased in recent years at an unprecedented pace. This is due to many different factors, including war, economic struggles, globalisation, and more recently, climate change.
Faced with this fact, we can see two groups of people reacting to it: the conservative get all fatalistic, want to either build walls or abolish borders (ie boundaries), express hostility, create conspiracy theories on a whim, etc. Okay, we know the jazz. On to the mentally healthier group: open-minded people of all political denominations look at the immigration phenomenon, say “bruh, that’s unprecedented [or translate it into your own lingo]”. Some study the phenomenon based on what we know, with calm, without panicking. Some don’t, but they don’t panic either. Instead of going straight to panic, they first get curious about it. They’re likely to engage directly with these immigrants, or collect indirect intel on them (not out-of-the-arse and chronically-online conspiracy theory based, but from first-hand accounts by people who actually met them in real life). That’s how even the most right-wing among the open-minded are unlikely to jump to conclusions or come up with an instant and simplistic solution on a whim.
There are leftists who act conservative faced with this issue, don’t get me wrong. (Revisit the definition I gave you in the intro, it matters here). What do they do? Well, they’re left-wing, so they’re not going to say “get off my lawn”, but their conservatism (ie, inability to think outside the pre-established box) stops them from realising that there’s more complexity to this phenomenon than just “let’s welcome everyone with open arms because if you don’t you’re elitist! Boo! Don’t be elitist! I’ll fight you!”. See? That’s a knee-jerk panic reaction too. It’s just not right-wing but it’s conservative all the same, it came straight out of a History book about the 1950s. Ain’t nothing creative or relevant to the modern day about it.
I could go on and on with examples, but you get the gist.
Love it or hate it, conservative attitudes come from an immature and impulsive outlook on life. Perhaps there’s a better way to live?
