Can Conservatives Be Pro-Social Justice

…so asks the College Republicans in an event they are cosponsoring with the ultra-left Social Justice Center.

How is social justice being defined? After all, if it means something absurd like working for the equality of economic circumstance, being supportive of every minority or special interest groups and their right to play the role of victim, or otherwise advancing the politically correct, historically sanitized hyper-multiculturalism that is destroying Europe and to a lesser extent the United States, then the obvious answer is no. Such ideas are the product of defective liberal thought, hinging on the suppression of individual rights for the sake of an inexact common good. If however it means tolerance and open-mindedness, judging people on their qualifications and competence rather than inconsequential details such as race or gender, or supporting a system of legal and equality and an opportunity-creating free market, then there can be no bigger advocate for social justice than the conservative. In either such case, the question would answer itself. Thus, what I find troubling is that a conservative group would adopt uncritically such an outmoded liberal buzz word and offensively use it to question to the character of their own ideological brethren.

Quite why it is that the College Republicans would willingly associate themselves with the Social Justice Center to ask such an absurd question in so inappropriate a capacity is beyond me. There are, in my estimation, only two potential answers. First, the College Republicans have become so worn down by the tide of liberal ideological oppression at Washington University that they cannot remain steadfast enough in principle to distance themselves from such nonsense. Second, this is a desperate attempt to win approval and wider campus acceptance at an institution where their image is not particularly positive as a consequence of their ideology. It may well be a combination of the two. In any case, this illustrates a serious problem of the CR that extends well beyond their partisan alignment. They are doing nothing to advance conservative intellectual discourse or conservative principles, instead facilitating the myth of balance and ideological tolerance by being the useful token organization that can be cited as a conservative force, but which has been declawed and lobotomized.

The CLA was offered the opportunity to be involved with this event, but the scant details and inappropriate name immediately turned us off. This is a decision the group made of which I am especially proud. After all, dialogue across ideological lines has its place, but playing the patsy for an exceptionally liberal organ of an overwhelmingly liberal institution as they treat conservatism in monolithic terms and subsequently evaluate it by their own warped rubric does not. If the left wishes to discuss true conservative philosophy and its aims, they must first realize that the Republican Party is by no means conservative, and that the College Republicans do not speak for us. They must further understand that such discussions will not be held on their lopsided terms over which we lack control, but in a way that treats conservatives and our ideologies fairly. There is certainly a place for such discussions, and I believe the CLA can and should play a vital role in them. But this cannot happen when we tie ideology to partisan identity and then emphasize their offshoot student groups as the chief sources of credibility in the political discourse.

If you liked this post, you may also enjoy these recent articles:

• Croatia A Victim? Not in This Century
• More on the Universal Beatz Controversy
• Multiculuturalism: Anti-Semitism’s New Mantel
• Minimizing Tragedy: The Damning Effects of False Rape
• Israel’s Mexicans