Whig and Tory do not quite mean what they did. The agreement upon a constitutional monarchy seemed to salve over the wound of succession. For a while the Whigs were aristocracy and the Tories were Anglicans. Then there were the new Tory and Whig parties in the late 1700s. Now the Whigs seem to be but a memory and the Conservative Party has often used the moniker Tory (though without much precision as to why and what it means). But it was good while it lasted. Even Americans used those terms (at least around the time of the Revolution).
Our terms today are less descriptive and much more pedestrian. Liberal and conservative dominate the political discussion. Traditional and modernist seem to describe our cultural divide. Confessional and moderate are used for Lutheran distinctions within my own church body. What ever happened to good words like Whig and Tory? Why can't we invent better terms to describe ourselves and our opponents (never mind the venue) than relative terms? Liberal and conservative are almost meaningless (hence our flirtation with populist, progressive, and libertarian). Traditional and modernist may hint at the great differences here but they do not help to identify them clearly. In the Missouri Synod moderates insist they are confessional and confessionals are, to some degree, at war with each other as much as the, well, moderates.
So my challenge for a while is to invent better terms, short concise but descriptive terms to be used in our political debate, in our culture conflicts, and especially within my own Missouri domain. If you can help me, send me your best alternatives.
4 comments:
The idea that the Tories weren't aristocrats during the Jacobite struggles is incorrect. You might find Eveline Cruickshanks' Political Untouchables: The Tories and the '45 to be a helpful read.
Conservative vs liberal are still apt terms. Of course, within both ways of thinking are differences of opinion on specifics of dogma, on application of principles, and on degrees of passion. But essentially, conservatives and liberals hold opposing viewpoints, and liberals normally fall on the side of progressives, while conservatives prefer more traditional approaches. In some cases, conservatives and liberals can meet in the center, find common ground, and actually work together.
I think many people hold a mix of libertarian, conservative and liberal views which they frequently apply to specific issues. Many do not like to be committed blindly to one particular side, when facts have a way of helping us examine in detail the matter at hand. In my own views, I lean conservative, but may agree with liberals on specific and limited matters. I vote as an independent primarily to keep my sense of balance open, but have yet to support liberal social causes which conflict with my faith and biblical worldview. I believe our faith should be the primary lens through which we discern our opinions and positions on issues, examined individually, and regardless of whether or not they can be ascertained as conservative or liberal, or fall in the libertarian column.
In this video, visual age, maybe we should search for Art work, or a video to describe opposing sides. Words will always change in their meaning, just look at the monikers Republican and Democrat. In a postmodern age (whether we like it or not), it is important to begin all discussions by defining terms, and ensuring that all sides mean the same thing when they use descriptors.
The Slicksters and the Abrasives.
Post a Comment