It’s natural to attribute the surety of right wing convictions to billionaire funded deliberate disinformation that is replicated inside the replay bubble of conservative media and nationalist pulpits—although these are all active factors, they would not have the effect they do on their audiences without some cultural preconditions to believe them. The foundation of these beliefs predates the MAGA phenomenon, the social Darwinism of neoliberal economics, the fundamentalist movement of the early 20th Century, the several iterations of the Ku Klux Klan, and the Barbados planters’ justification for their brutal slavery practices. It comes down to competing beliefs in a hierachical vs. an egalitarian society.
In an article on his Substack, America’s Mayor, Ben Wheeler cuts through the bafflement many people have regarding the apparent contradictions in conservative thought—such as, for example, how can one claim to support both law enforcement and also their January 6 assailants at the US Capitol. Conservatives, however, view themselves as neither hypocrites nor blind sheep, ignorant nor evil, as contrasted with the widely held view of them outside their tribe. Wheeler cuts to the chase about what’s going on here—it involves very different basic world views about the nature of humanity itself.
Wheeler cites American political scientist Frank Wilhoit’s assertion that the backbone of conservatism is that there must be in-groups the law protects but does not bind, and out-groups the law binds but does not protect—persons who hold this view in all likelihood consider themselves to be in the group the law protects but doesn’t bind. At its core this is a vision of a strict hierarchical society, with necessary defense of established hierarchy against threats from below. This is contrasted with the view of humanity in the Declaration of Independence, which lays out an egalitarian universalist vision for the country while also aiming to kill preexisting hierarchies. The conflict between these two perspectives is obvious—they’re pulling in fundamentally opposite directions.
Another source of conservative ideology that Wheeler points out is Robert Filmer’s Patriarcha or The Natural Power of Kings from 1680, which posits that human society is not a collection of equal individuals bound by a social contract, but a divinely ordained, rigid hierarchy where some are born to rule and others are born to serve. Although it’s unlikely the average MAGA supporter has read Filmer, Wheeler suggests his ideas have mutated into a potent blend of cultural populism and Christian Nationalism, and that the same political sect that supports ICE grabbing random people off the street, also supported slave catchers in their day. Demands for Law and Order are not calling for an impartial application of the rule of law to all citizens equally; they are calling for the enforcement of this social hierarchy. This viewpoint colors what conservatives consider to be lawful and unlawful—and with it whom one considers to be a crook.
From this Wheeler illustrates that liberals have futilely appealed to the universalist, egalitarian ideals of the Declaration of Independence in hopes that conservatives will see the error of their ways—this has turned out to be a fool’s errand. A ready example is the unequal application of Romans 13 [where Paul declares all government is legitimate for God’s purposes]—when a conservative government is in power, it’s Romans 13 to the hilt; when government does something contrary to conservative ideology, it’s crickets about Romans 13.
Although the discussion here centers on traditional conservative hierarchies, hierarchical in-group/out-group manifestations appear within the left as well, ranging from established exclusionary insiders to more recently virtue signaling progressives—it’s repugnant no matter who does it, even though the clickish people on the left don’t hold a candle to the formal hierarchies discussed above. Communist and Fascist hierarchies alike, such as the former Soviet Union or Nazi Germany, are functionally structures of privileged vs. non-privileged, and the outer labels are essentially irrelevant.
What to do? Wheeler concludes that those of the egalitarian universalist persuasion must understand that those favoring hierarchy are not failing to live up to 1776, but are actively fighting for the hierarchy of 1680—and then respond to those beliefs appropriately. It’s appropriate to recognize that the mere holding of strong sincere beliefs does not in and of itself make those beliefs true or validated in any other way—without external positive confirmation a belief remains unfounded, no matter how much propaganda is applied to secure such belief. One starting point is to highlight that anyone inside the protected class could find themselves outside it at any time, no matter who you are. Ways one could lose membership in the hierarchy is to befriend the wrong people, use unapproved phrases, express forbidden beliefs, dress or act outside approved hierarchical norms, or otherwise challenge the hierarchy’s foundations—offend the hierarchy and they’ll point the cannon at you as well as the others. Those who compromise their own observations and beliefs not only give up their agency; they also lose their humanity—it’s not worth it in the end. While it may be a challenge for individuals in their unique circumstances, we can still do what each can to simultaneously work toward a better world where the equal humanity of all persons is respected in all aspects.