Pre-fab Isn't An Insult

Donald Douglas brings my attention to some folks criticizing more traditional conservatives as pre-fab conservatives. While Donald takes the notion on in depth, the language really is fundamentally flawed. New ideas represented by sloppy language rarely catch on in the minds of serious people.

Pre-fabrication is not cheap, superficial, or un-thoughtful. If anything, it's the opposite, generally delivering more value in a different way. For lack of a better word, one might say the opposite of pre-fabricated, is customized. From showers and tubs, to steel and concrete homes and computers, pre-fabrication requires a good deal of planning and careful thought. One often pays a higher price for the base materials, as labor costs versus production costs are so much lower. There's nothing dumb, or un-serious about that. It's actually fairly smart.

What makes the language really imprecise is the topic at hand: political ideology. When it comes to espousing any political ideology to the masses, it's actually the best method, though that shouldn't be taken as representative of how it was derived.

If one is espousing a political ideology that's all over the place through individual customization, one isn't really selling anything. More likely, they are simply advancing a political argument and unaware of the distinction between what they're saying versus what they are advocating.

The prefab conservative, or prefab-con, brings the same attitude to political discourse: rather than using reason and critical thinking to craft arguments that fit the real world, he trots out prefabricated memes, arguments and conclusions that are passably functional at best.

What is actually being advocated is a catch as catch can approach to developing one's political ideology. This is popular now, so that's my ideology today. And if the polls change, I'll let you know what it is tomorrow.

That's not nearly as deeply, or well thought out as it is fad-ish, or perhaps synthetic as an ideology is the better word. I'll stop short of calling it fake, phony, or even fraudulent, though there may be an argument to be made. If one looks at the definition of ideology, you'll see that it doesn't serve well at all. 

A set of doctrines or beliefs that form the basis of a political, economic, or other system.

But then, ideas are pretty much like opinions. But let's not go there lest someone feel as though they are being purged. For more discussion, see Donald's post at American Power here.

Comments

[Ran]

"rather than using reason and critical thinking to craft arguments that fit the real world"

Where to begin? One, the assumption of a lack of critical reasoning. Two, new arguments are required to fit the "real" world. La pus ça change... Then there's the underlying assumption that one's ideology must morph to accommodate the false premises that comprise a new "reality." This is exactly what had discredited Frum and is now killing One-N...

Sorry. Cicero's Natural Law applied as properly in his time as it did to the Founders as it does today. What, I should sacrifice inalienable rights and duties under Natural Law on the altar of "global warming" to accommodate today's "reality"? F^ck that. So I'm pre-fab. Sure beats being a spineless squish.

[seekeronos]

Well... to carry the analogy further, wouldn't that make folks like Coner Friedersdorf a "custom con" with his self-definition as a "conservo-libertarian" with his appeal to self-styled intellectualist NYT-reading latte-sippers from the Upper East Side who know to keep the riff-raff out of their co-ops?

[Jake]

I'm a "hydra-con". When I have to listen to someone is too inept to use traditional language to define his beliefs and who attempts to reform the zeitgeist by making up language to cover his ineptness/lack of conviction, I let an arm fall off and grow a new one. I win.

[dad29]

catch as catch can approach to developing one's political ideology.

Something akin to those thrills Cardinal Newman referred to as "enthusiasms," or GKChesterton would have called "fashions."