Stalking the Feral Conservative
May 7, 2017
There’s always been a few out in the wild, living off-the-grid in cabins and caves – mostly in Idaho or Montana. We don’t see them much. After all, they left the pack and only interact to acquire goods they can’t make themselves – like bullets or bibles. (Yeah, it’s a bit hypocritical to condemn and abandon society while remaining dependent on it, but freedom requires both god and guns.)
While, this group of survivalists/mountain men/rugged individualists tend to tact (very) conservative, they fall closer to wild than to feral on the socialization scale. Sure, most of them were originally domesticated, but they (pretty much) opted out of everything and remain apart. They don’t care what the pack does, just as long as the pack leaves them alone (and keeps manufacturing cheap 165 grain .308 rifle rounds).
No, those conservatives have gone wild not feral. And, at least, they’re consistent in their conservationism – they don’t give a shit about the rest of us and expect the same. Seems reasonable in an abstract big picture way.
It’s the ones who have abandoned domesticated behavior, yet continue to hang with the pack and expect the pack to honor the rules, while they don’t, that meet the truly feral criteria.
We all know a few: the guy who violates the “don’t be a dick” rule by marginalizing LGBT people, but who cries foul when criticized because his (pack guaranteed) religious rights are being violated. Or the really rich guy who, ignores the “it’s bad form to victimize the weakest among us” guideline and raises the cost of essential drugs to make more money that he doesn’t need, but whines about his unfair unpopularity and decaying stock value.
Certainly, the Donald is a master at feral conservative behavior. Off the top of my head, that ever-popular “nasty woman” comment he interrupted Hillary with during the second debate was classic. She was speaking, in turn; he had spent days screaming “lock her up” and calling her all sorts of colorful names. Yet, when he interrupted her with “nasty woman” he was counting on the pack not interrupting him or acting in an aggressive way towards him. And he won that bet.
Perhaps, had they shut off his microphone or had someone in the crowd responded, in real-time, with, “Shut up and let her talk you fucking predator!” his tactic would have been less effective. But the rules say don’t interrupt and keep it civil – and he counted it. (I wonder if continuously fantasizing about breaking social rules and crushing elected leaders is a sign of going feral? Just wondering.)
Over the last one-hundred-eighty post-election days the Donald has displayed a willingness to ignore all rules of common civilized behavior. Whether it’s lying about easily verifiable facts, calling other adults names as if we’re in fifth grade or bombing other countries as after diner entertainment, his behavior does not adhere to the pack norm.
Hence, the republic has begun to wonder about the value in treating him in a civil fashion. He’s using our own civility against us. Perhaps, there’s nothing to be done about that. But recognition and reassessment may be prudent.
In Peace and Justice,