So there's this. In some sense, the two American political impulses are locked in a perpetual unwinnable death-match, the reforming impulse and the conserving impulse. The extreme of Conservative America always builds monuments to itself in the past; the extreme of Liberal America denigrates the past to celebrate itself in the present. One sells the idolatry of "progress," while the other sells the idolatry of nostalgia.
I have never minded these "liberal" films; I only mind when it is pretended that the imperfect narrative is itself a lie. Progressivism run amok is bitter and destructive; these people mistake cynicism for courage. Isn't the story of the Scriptures the story of a highly imperfect people under the loving tutelage of a holy God? Their imperfection does not invalidate the fact that they are His. Indeed, recognizing a need for growth does not require denouncing one's very existence.
On the other hand, there is nothing truly conservative about revising the past to make it pristine. It wasn't, and it will never be. That's why we call them ideals: they're not high enough if we don't fail them. Isn't it rather a heroic thing, to say, "This is America, the greatest nation mankind has ever known, and this injustice is not worthy of America"? Are you sure that's a liberal impulse? What good are we, if we pick the wrong things to conserve?
On the other hand, the progressive often picks the cause of the moment to be The Gravest Injustice Ever. I know that failing to allow persons of the same sex to "marry" is not going to be a black mark against the nation. In fact, the opposite is the case. I do believe we will be called to account for how our selfishness, played out in sexual "liberation," has damaged our children, our families, and all families. I digress.
Isn't it true that a person from a dominant culture who learns of injustices committed in his name from another, who appreciates the other in ways he was not prepared to acknowledge, actually testifying to the universality of values? To the objectivity of morality? I ask you, what is more conservative than that?
I have never minded these "liberal" films; I only mind when it is pretended that the imperfect narrative is itself a lie. Progressivism run amok is bitter and destructive; these people mistake cynicism for courage. Isn't the story of the Scriptures the story of a highly imperfect people under the loving tutelage of a holy God? Their imperfection does not invalidate the fact that they are His. Indeed, recognizing a need for growth does not require denouncing one's very existence.
On the other hand, there is nothing truly conservative about revising the past to make it pristine. It wasn't, and it will never be. That's why we call them ideals: they're not high enough if we don't fail them. Isn't it rather a heroic thing, to say, "This is America, the greatest nation mankind has ever known, and this injustice is not worthy of America"? Are you sure that's a liberal impulse? What good are we, if we pick the wrong things to conserve?
On the other hand, the progressive often picks the cause of the moment to be The Gravest Injustice Ever. I know that failing to allow persons of the same sex to "marry" is not going to be a black mark against the nation. In fact, the opposite is the case. I do believe we will be called to account for how our selfishness, played out in sexual "liberation," has damaged our children, our families, and all families. I digress.
Isn't it true that a person from a dominant culture who learns of injustices committed in his name from another, who appreciates the other in ways he was not prepared to acknowledge, actually testifying to the universality of values? To the objectivity of morality? I ask you, what is more conservative than that?
Comments