The Rovian wordsmiths on the Right have coined the phrase “values voters” to suggest that we on the Left, with our supposedly hedonistic lifestyles, our internationalism that apparently precludes any patriotic feelings, our tolerance for weirdos and perverts, and our eagerness to try strange meals thought up by Berkeleyites like Alice Waters, lack any moral sensibility. But of course, we’re values voters too.
We’re authentically pro-life. We want to preserve the lives of our troops by extracting them from an unnecessary war; to protect foreign civilians threatened by carnage; to end the death penalty, with all its inequities; to use stem cell research in order to save the lives of people already born, already suffering, and already beloved by their families and friends. We favor universal health care, rather than a for-profit system and a bloated military budget that benefits contractors like Halliburton. Most of us are so pro-life that we’re baffled by the idea that every American should be armed to the teeth, thus making it possible for a child or family member to kill another person by accident. Some of us are so conscientiously pro-life that we won’t eat our fellow mammals because they suffer fear, unhappiness, and pain as we do. We’re more likely to have served in the Peace Corps, Teach for America, or Doctors without Borders than in the Marines.
Of course, when we have served our country in battle, the hypocritical pundits on the right sneer at us anyway. George McGovern, a fighter pilot in World War II, was mocked in 1972, while Ronald Reagan, who served in some film unit during that war, is celebrated. Max Cleland, who had three limbs amputated in Vietnam, lost reelection thanks to shameless rightwing ad-hominem attacks. And John Kerry, of course, was “swiftboated,” while George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Dan Quayle, Donald Rumsfeld, et al., escaped censure for dodging the Vietnam draft while shamelessly supporting the war itself.
We on the Left are for the preservation of the earth from thoughtless depradation, unnecessarily accelerated by ostentatiously huge trucks and SUVs, usually seen carrying a single passenger who, like some French aristocrat before the revolution, pridefully menaces smaller cars, pedestrians, and cyclists. Our values include tolerance for people who aren’t like us: who don’t share our sexual preference, nationality, ethnicity, race, or views about religion.
Some of us would describe the so-called “values voters” as provincial, xenophobic, ignorant of history, and deeply convinced of the inferiority of women. Indeed, I would argue that attitudes toward women are a litmus test of attitudes toward modernity. Even though Mary Wollstonecraft published her Vindication of the Rights of Women back in 1792, even though suffragettes won the vote for American women in 1920, “values voters” think that feminism began in the 1960s. So much for their historical knowledge. Women, they think, belong in the kitchen, bedroom, or–since this is an attitude they share with Osama bin Laden–burka.
The Right used to call us “bleeding hearts” because of our concern for the welfare of our fellow citizens and hapless foreigners. Now the heartless Right, which has long admired the “selfishness” of Ayn Rand’s shallow, self-serving “philosophy,” claims to have “values” other than the value of money-other than the unimpeded right to profit by polluting the environment, taking short-cuts on product quality, underpaying and maltreating workers, shipping American jobs abroad, and bombing the hell out of any country it pleases.
And what are these values? They are negative stances: against stem cell research, abortion, and gay marriage. I wouldn’t call those “values” at all.
It is curious, too, that when right-wing fundamentalist Christians quote the Bible, it is the Old Testament they favor. It’s the Ten Commandments they want carved on official buildings, not the “bleeding heart,” pinko aphorisms of Jesus: turn the other cheek, bless those that curse you, give all you have to the poor, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven, etc.
But since those on the Right have coined and claimed the term “values voters,” since that term implicitly puts us in disrepute, and since the media pundits will mindlessly repeat it, we need a succinct way to describe ourselves.
I propose that we call ourselves “conscience voters.” I
encourage every Democrat, Green, and leftist to use this term, publicly and privately. I strongly urge all Democratic presidential candidates to say, “I represent conscience voters.” Because that’s who we really are-people who have come to grips with issues like inequality, discrimination, and suffering, arriving at the conclusion that we should speak out against injustice, even when we ourselves are not the victims of that injustice. We are not people who want to shield ourselves from our fellow Americans by living in gated communities and driving Hummers, but people who possess empathy, who believe in education, in preserving our national parks (including our battlefields), in good jobs for American workers, and in mutual aid. People who want to promote what the founders of this country called “social happiness.”
We’re conscience voters.
Carol V. Hamilton has a Ph.D. from Berkeley. Her articles and poems have been published in Oxford German Studies (England), the Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies, C-Theory.net (Canada), The Paris Review, The North American Review, and many other literary and scholarly journals. She has also written for the San Francisco Chronicle, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, and a number of alternative papers. She is currently writing a historical account of political ideologies (and looking for a commercial publisher.)
Can anybody who votes for a Democrat be a conscience voter? Christ, after listening to Hillary Clinton yesterday on Meet the Press, I laugh at the question. So far my conscience tells me, “None of the Above.” Then, the most cynical part of it creeps in and says, “Hell, join the Republicans …at least then you’ll be on the winning team!”
Having served two tours in Vietnam in a Recon unit, I thank you for pointing out the obvious. The people who chose to avoid war are indeed celebrated, and those who went to war vilified for the sake of winning elections at all costs. While true, what does that say about those who believe the bullshit and continue to support a right wing neo con agenda? Perhaps more importantly, it should also be noted that the mainstream political entities, are both bought and paid for by corporations thus insuring the status quo prevails. My vote will again go to a third party/independent candidate.
In that spirit, please support Cindy Sheehan’s campaign for congress: http://www.sheehanforcongress.us Thank you!
Must we settle for a choice selected for us by the corporatocracy? Wy can’t we unite behind an alternative who really represents us?
Voting for a third party, or for Cindy Sheehan, is also a “conscience vote.” And Hillary Clinton is not a good representative for the views in this article. But cynicism like that in the above comments won’t help the country; it just makes the speaker feel self-righteously pure. We’re all tainted by corporations, unless we refuse to ride in gas-powered vehicles, grow our own food, and either make everything we need to live, or go dumpster-diving.
Anyway, the point of the article isn’t to endorse a Democrat; it’s to counter the idea that the Right is the ideology with values.
What btraven said. Progressives need a clear, coherent message. Like it or not, the Right is always “on message” and it works very well for them. The Left could learn a lesson here. If every liberal used “conscience voter” to describe themselves, it would be a step in the right direction.
Thank you Carol Hamilton. I’m sure George Lakoff would approve of the new “frame” as per “conscience voter.” Makes sense to me, and thank you for detailing all the ways that progressives act (and believe) to make our world a shared place of peace and mutual respect, rather than a terrorist zone of continuous wars, all based on media pumping up the enemy du jour.
Frosty Bunny: “Progressives need a clear, coherent message.”
So totally, completely agreed with you. The problem is the Democrats. A center-right, pro-business party masquerading as the opposite, soaking up all the votes from half an electorate that ought to (and usually does) know better.
A center-right, pro-business party masquerading as the opposite, soaking up all the votes from half an electorate that ought to (and usually does) know better.
Yes, yes and yes.
This is how bad it is: Our daughter-in-law, who is very religious, has bought into the “family values” and “moral majority” rhetoric of the right, and has forbidden us to talk about our “conscience values” (primarily, our opposition to the war in Iraq and our opinions on how Bush has hurt our country and violated our freedoms) with our grandchildren on pain of never allowing them to visit us again.
How did we get here? How did the ugly, hateful, discrimimatory, intolerant, incompassionate views of the right ever become the values of the so-called “moral majority” (of course, the moral majority is neither moral or a majority). Why is there even a debate about this? I am a Christian because I believe in the example of the teachings and life of Christ, as I understand them. Christ was concerned about the poor, the down-trodden, those who were discriminated against. He believed in the “Golden Rule”, and social justice. He did not hate rich people, but he charged them with the responsibility of using thier wealth for the benefit of the poor. He told us that we must care for each other, and our environment. He taught us the principle of the separation of church and state. He never advocated the application of political or military power to force people to choose to follow Him or adhere to religious dogma. Why are these not the values we all believe in, religious and non-religious alike?
It seems to me that there is a huge vacuum out there waiting to be filled by a person or party that can articulate “Concience Values” in a way that will resonate with everyone. Somehow, the right always manages to frame the debates in ways that makes those who believe in those values look like the bad guys. Where is the political genius, a “Karl Rove” who can sieze the initiative and turn public opinion in favor of compassion and reason. A number of people and organizations have tried, but somehow, the left is always out-flanked. The rhetoric of the right “sounds right” to the masses, even though to those on the left, it sounds horribly wrong. We cannot even talk to each other anymore. God help us!
I believe you could vote for democrat Kucinich and be a conscience voter. I am surprised no one has mentioned him, but then the fact that he does not have the funding that Hillary and Obama have he gets no press coverage. The problem for us conscience voters is that republicans will vote for whoever is nominated for their party because they just want to win, no matter how bad their jerk is.
capt clevariant: I sympathise with your painful predicament.
As your grandchildren grow, I hope they will see and appreciate, without a word being said, that your values are the right ones.
Their parents may try to brainwash them, but kids are shrewder than we think.
It’s a hard road. I wish you wisdom and strength (but I’m sure you have both in abundance).
I am damn proud to have named by business Bleeding Hearts Club. And the fact that I print a “peace heart” on the sleeve of each shirt IS strength. Glad that Ms. Hamilton is giving the term some empowering lip service.
“I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ.” - Gandhi
capt.clevariant:
_____________________________________________________________________________
We carried you in our arms
On Independence Day,
And now you’d throw us all aside
And put us on our way.
Oh what dear daughter ‘neath the sun
Would treat a father so,
To wait upon him hand and foot
And always tell him, “No”?
Tears of rage, tears of grief,
Why must I always be the thief?
Come to me now, you know
We’re so alone
And life is brief.
_____________________________________________________________________________
• “Tears of Rage” (Dylan/Manuel)
Karl Rove is a twit and always has been a twit. He’s a straw man for the Democrats because they lack the ability to go to their base with coherent ideas that their base supports.
CAPT CLEVARIANT: Your depiction of the true teachings of Christ are right on and would do the Master proud. Surely you recognize that almost none of them are consistent with what the evangelicals (50 million strong) are espousing. If your child identifies with one of these authoritarian groups, it’s probably because life today feels so uncertain. Some people really want to believe that if they follow narrow rules, everything will turn out OK; they will please their maker and never know pain or privation. This barter system–religious institutions promising their followers better lives by playing by the supposed Higher rule book–has been influencing souls for centuries. Some fly over the Cuckoo’s Nest before others; and it is important to take wing when that spirit of flight hits, for how to be an example to others? (You may want to re-read Richard Bach’s book, Illusions.)
btraven
Have you risen from the dead. Considering your mysterious past, maybe all reports of your death were false.
Well. Many people have been investigating your past to find who you really are? Were you Ret Marut who lived, wrote and orated during the 1919 Munich Revolutions?
For all those who are searching for a model of non-capitalist self-government, you should recommend Government from your Jungle Novels (that described the Mexican Revolution amongst the Maya of Chiapas).
I knew you would finally enter into the world of the Internet. I always enjoyed your wry, Brechtian wit;-)
Great article. The People need to read this.
Progress=life
Conservatism=death
It’s really very simple. WE have more light than they do darkness. WE can reduce THEIR power to ash. WE can end THEIR long, dark night.
That’s why we can’t push people away from Progress. That’s why I’ve been angry at some of the rhetoric on this site lately.
Frosty Bunny: “Progressives need a clear, coherent message.”
Yep.
I keep trying to think of something eloquent and poetic to say.
“I propose that we call ourselves “conscience voters.””
It sounds like an intelligent choice, especially when we’re talking about saving “actual” human beings and not “potential” human beings as is the case with cells sitting in a freezer, ready for implantation, or any cell that can be scraped off your body and cloned into a human.
Conscience voters “are-people who have come to grips with issues like inequality, discrimination, and suffering, arriving at the conclusion that we should speak out against injustice, even when we ourselves are not the victims of that injustice.”
Injustice is the root cause of most of our global problems, but unfortunately, many of our so-called value voters can’t seem to elevate themselves above the fear and hatred that permeate every cell in their selective, God-fearing existence.
On the other hand, it can be very lucrative for some of these God-fearing people when they can simply omit biblical teachings that don’t fit their self-centered, narrow world view.
Stilba–
“Can anybody who votes for a Democrat be a conscience voter?”
Damn right! http://www.dennis4president.com/home/
He may be a registered Democrat but he’s as close as you are going to get to Independent! Try thinking of him that way instead of “team-thinking”. Not all members of ANY team are inseparably alike.
“Conscience voter” sounds great to people that have one, which apparently does not apply to half of our voters. Problem is, it is too hard to spell and does not roll off the tongue like “support ——-”. Can you imagine how Limbaugh, and the FOX propagandists would figure out ways to ridicule it? I do believe the Dems would be better off with showing tolerance toward gays but forgetting the gay marriage thing. Being progressive is certainly a fine ideal, but that is one thing that is far too easily attacked to hang on to.
How about “fiscal and social sanity voters”??
Balakirev has recognized me! Yes, I used to be Ret Marut. Thank you for recommending my novel Government and the rest of that series. For a ripping yarn with some anarchist sentiments, let me suggest my novel, The Death Ship. But enough self-promotion…time for my siesta.
Remember, you purists, the Supreme Court is hanging by a thread, and the next president will set its agenda for decades.
“Conscience” isn’t hard to spell. It’s “con” (with) plus science (knowledge).
Those who aren’t willing to vote for Kucinich or any other Democrat are, I hope, at least working on the campaign for Proportional Representation.
By the way, I incorrectly included Rumsfeld in the list of chickenhawks above (I’m the author of this piece). I think I could have correctly included Gingrich, and having just found out that Bill O’Reilly is younger (58) than he looks, I have to wonder what he and Rush were doing when the Vietnam Draft went into effect.
F.F. = Flip Floppers
V.V. = Value Voters
Small minds,easy to remember.
Those lacking a conscience are sociopaths. It is estimated that 3% of males and 1% of females are born with this brain defect. Then there are the many who are trained to be sociopaths. Mind control programming within a family or a group is used to make people stop asking questions. They mentally block. We progressives probably don’t do well with these catch phrases because we weren’t programmed to be controlled by them.
“The Right used to call us “bleeding hearts” because of our concern for the welfare of our fellow citizens and hapless foreigners. Now the heartless Right, which has long admired the “selfishness” of Ayn Rand’s shallow, self-serving “philosophy,” claims to have “values” other than the value of money-other than the unimpeded right to profit by polluting the environment, taking short-cuts on product quality, underpaying and maltreating workers, shipping American jobs abroad, and bombing the hell out of any country it pleases.”
I think it should be pointed out that it was Clinton and a Democratic controlled congress that passed NAFTA, the original agreement that shifted American jobs overseas to a low wage area where workers were and are misteated in large numbers. And that Clinton also engaged in bombing the hell out of several other countries.
“I propose that we call ourselves “conscience voters.” I
encourage every Democrat, Green, and leftist to use this term, publicly and privately. I strongly urge all Democratic presidential candidates to say, “I represent conscience voters.”
There are Democrats, including some of the current presidential candidates, that also do not represent “conscience voters” IMO, and I would hate to see them adopt the term just to curry favor with those who consider themselves as such.
It not as simple as Republicans vs. Democrats anymore and everyone needs to wake up to that fact.
Lobo Gris
Democrats do not represent conscience voters. Democrats represent the beast capital.
Just an added note;
Alan Greenspan recently said that Bill Clinton was the best Republican that had been elected in a while.
Lobo Gris
How about all of us, Dems in Congress and Dem candidates stop this whole shell game of letting the right frame the discussion , from patriotism, troop support, etc?
Anytime the propaganda tricks start flying, stop the argument and start criticizing the argument instead of being sucked into it.
Probably one of the biggest weaknesses of the left that still isn’t sinking in yet.
How about calling ourselves ‘human beings’? What a concept!
We could respect the humanity that we all have inherently.
There are many studies that show how we are compassionate by nature and must be taught (’brainwashed ?) otherwise.
Check out this article from NY Times 9/18/2007:
Is ‘Do Unto Others’ Written Into Our Genes? by Nicholas Wade
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/18/science/18mora.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
“I’d rather vote for what I want and not get it than vote for what I don’t want and get it.”
I have no idea where that quote comes from, but it surely seems to encapsulate the idea of conscience voters. The lesser of two evils is still evil.
Of course, anarchists are against representation in any fashion and thus against voting. Every four years, Emma Goldman said, the American people give up their freedoms.
So if you oppose the lesser of two evils, if the Clintons are your entire idea of the Democratic party, and if you’re cool with electing Mitt Romney, enjoy your purity and let the world go to hell. Then what matters is that you’re not tainted. And in that case, I trust you have no other complicity in the capitalist system–no pension fund, no stocks, no automobile, etc.
I can see it all now another fascist Republican Congress, Senate and Executive branch in 2008. With people like Stilba and Frosty Bunny making certain we do. If you don’t vote Democratic who are you going to vote for? A third party candidate that can’t win? Not vote because you don’t like any of the candidates and are showing them that way? A fascist right wing Republican who always votes the party like so he can get enough funds to run again? I will be the first to admit I am not that happy with Democrat’s. But, right at the moment they are the least of the evils.
Thank you, Dr. Hamilton, for your excellent piece on “value voters”. I like and subscribe to your definition of “conscience voters”, but,like “value”, perhaps “conscience” has also been perverted by the Leader’s appropriation of “conscientious”, as used in his duplicitous moniker “conscientious conservative”? Maybe if you could tag the deluded and comatose value voters with “unconscious conservatives” then “conscience” would be available again to be employed as you suggest.
Very happy to hear that B. Traven is still with us. If only today’s youth would read him.