The Crowhill Journal

Conserving for the sake of conserving is a bad idea.

I was just reading a thread complaining that social issues tend to go like this. Liberals propose Crazy Idea #1. Conservatives oppose it. Liberals propose Crazy Idea #2, which goes even further. Conservatives say, “can’t we just do Crazy Idea #1?”

That does tend to happen too often, but conservatives also have forward-looking ideas. (Think of Newt Gingrich.) They just frame those ideas in the context of the tried and true.

Which raises the question, what is a better term for people who are called conservative?

Too many “conservative” labels and terms are backwards looking. “Originalist.” “Constitutionalist.” “Founding Fathers.”

Conservatism needs a re-branding and a new vision that respects the past, but looks forward.

I’m not saying conservatives don’t do those things, but that the brand doesn’t promote that perspective. Also, a more forward-looking feel might attract more young people.

Tonight, Pigweed and Crowhill are going to record a show about the history of religious revivals in America, and compare that with what happened at Asbury University.

Any questions, thoughts, or things you’d like us to discuss?

If you feel inclined, please leave a note about your favorite Passover customs or memories.

From my home office window I have a nice view of the road in front of my house. I see lots of people walking dogs, taking their daily constitutional, etc.

I just saw a man and a boy — I assume a father and son — riding down the sidewalk on the same bicycle.

Some people would see what I saw and say, “The boy isn’t wearing a helmet!! And you’re not supposed to ride on the sidewalk!”

Okay. I agree that kids should wear helmets, and that the sidewalk isn’t for bikes. But what I see is a father being involved with his son, and I think that’s far more important.