Hit Their Strength: GOP's Moral Relativism and Situational Ethics

[darkstar]

It is a noted Rove tactic to attack the opposition's strengths in addition to attack on weaknesses.

So....

I say it is high time that the notions of "moral relevancy" and "situational ethics" be injected into the political debate AGAINST THE GOP as the "big picture" frame, if you will.


Obviously, the conventional meta-narrative of American political wisdom is that libs are relativists and the cons "stand for clear cut principles of right and wrong." Abortion. Stem cells. Gay marriage. It's the hobby horse of con-pundits like Hannity, Bennett, etc. wherein shades of gray are "the slippery slope."

By extension, cons frequently extend this absolutist posturing to judicial and constitutional matters. Gun control. Private property rights(from environmental impact to estate taxes). You know, "strict constitutionalists" vs "interpretation that amounts to legislating from the bench."

So what to make of the disconnect between this professed philosophy of absolutes and rationales such as the following: "It's a entirely different kind of enemy than we've ever seen before"; "We need new intelligence tools in the face of terrorism plotted in the information age"; "Our enemy in Iraq doesn't wear a uniform"; and, of course, the biggie--"9/11 changed everything"?


Nearly every time I watch a political crossfire debate-type show, I wind up wishing that the representative from the left would point up these moral and situational relativism at the bottom of these sorts of arguments defend everything from pre-emptive war to racial profiling, water boarding to wiretaps.


Why won't our side hit them with this? I think we should. It's my hobby-horse of sorts--I've written about it on DU before--but I think that between the upcoming campaign season and the nearly five years post-9/11 (and a receding knee jerk emotionalism associated with it that has obscured this argument), that I'm not going to rest easy with my party until I hear SOMEONE on our side begin to CLEARLY point out,in the public square, this relativism that undergirds practically every point of the neo-con agenda.

[gulliver]

1. Well, our side is making so many other great moves...

... they just don't have time to make the one you are talking about.

Seriously, I agree with you. Attacking their strength is exactly the thing to do. We tend to do exactly the opposite, embrace the opponent's strength.

It's funny that these "frame the issue" threads, including the good ones like yours don't seem to last long. Maybe it is silent agreement, or maybe people have just lost all hope in our Dem leaders with respect to rhetorical skills and courage.

[darkstar]

2. Thank fer the reply gulliver

It really doesn't make any sense, does it?

Anyhow, I don't write much hear--maybe it's my lack of proofreading abilities, huh?--so I appreciate the response and the chance to kick in the PM hours.

:hi:

[Odin2005]

3. That will be very tough.

the perceived connection between the left and relativism is very strong because of the ignorant "you must be religious to be moral" meme.