Crunch!

I have just finished reading Rod Dreher’s Crunchy Cons: How Birkenstocked Burkeans, gun-loving organic gardeners, evangelical free-range farmers, hip homeschooling mamas, right-wing nature lovers, and their diverse tribe of countercultural conservatives plan to save America (or at least the Republican Party).

The reaction to this book is evident all over the blogosphere and I think that the book provides food for thought. 

 Here’s an excellent synopsis and a fair critique of the book from Publishers Weekly:

What do you call people who vote for Bush but shop at Whole Foods? Crunchy cons. And according to Dreher, an editor at the Dallas Morning News, they're forming a thriving counterculture within the contemporary conservative movement. United by a "cultural sensibility, not an ideology," crunchy conservatives, he says, have some habits and beliefs often identified with cultural liberals, like shopping at agriculture co-ops and rejecting suburban sprawl. Yet crunchy cons stand apart from both the Republican "Party of Greed" and the Democratic "Party of Lust," he says, by focusing on living according to conservative values, what the author calls "sacramental" living . . . His conversations with other crunchy conservatives—e.g., the policy director of Republicans for Environmental Protection, a Manhattan home-schooler, the author's wife—are illuminating, but the book fails to offer any empirical evidence to connect these individuals to a wider "movement." Instead, it works best as an indictment of consumerism and the spiritual havoc it can wreak. While his complaints about consumer culture are similar to those advanced by liberals, Dreher frames his criticism of corporate America in explicitly conservative terms, painting rampant consumerism as antithetical to true conservatism.

Crunchy conservatism seems to accord well with my idea of the modest woman. It is based on the value of restraint not only in sexual affairs but with every area of life especially the economic sphere. Mr. Dreher states (in one of my favorite quotes from the book), “A conservatism that does not recognize the need for restraint, for limits, and for humility is neither helpful to individuals and society nor ultimately, conservative. This is particularly true with respect to the natural world” (p. 2). The modest woman will agree with the crunchy con that consumerism (the discourse which builds and encourages the insatiable desire to accumulate more material things and is wholly opposed to the idea of restraint) is devastating to any person’s development of virtue.

My first blog posting touched on the fact that saddest truth about women today is that they do not know themselves. In a sense, many women are alienated from themselves. Reading Crunchy Cons helped me to see that this alienation which is typical of modern society comes about in part because of consumerism. If a woman is too busy concerning herself with what type of clothes she should buy to impress others or which rich man to marry so that she can become rich too or what type of high powered job she should go into so that she can make tons of money--if a woman occupies herself with these thoughts then there is no room to contemplate the essential questions of her life--who she is truly (and she is not just her vagina!) and what she should be doing to better the world. 

Crunchy conservatism is also based on the sacredness of life--that everything has a meaning and transcendental purpose. Religious crunchy cons will add on that everything has a purpose as determined by God. This sacredness leads to the belief that there are things that are true, good, and beautiful and these things are not only immensely valuable but knowable. This should sound familiar to the modest woman. What is truly beautiful is in someway connected with that which is good and true. Immodesty like the type proposed to us from pop culture is clearly none of these things. How many times have you recoiled when you saw a girl walking around in a skirt that is waaaay too short for her? Or when you see guys that think it’s cool to “sag” and have their pants far below their waist line? These reactions to the immodesty of some people’s dress suggest that we intuitively know that the style of dress is neither beautiful nor good. A sacramental view of life eliminates such behaviors and instead orients us toward a more virtuous life.

So, I’ve taken some of my favorite points from the book and tried to apply them to my idea of  modesty. Undoubtedly, while reading the book, you will discover other points that you can apply. I think that crunchy conservatism has a lot to teach us, and I am grateful to Mr. Dreher for documenting this exciting phenomenon.

If you’ve read the book, let me know what you think about the connection between crunchy cons and modesty. If you haven’t read the book, stop reading this and start reading Crunchy Cons!

Comments

[R.B.]

Crunchy Conservatives are anti-consumerist? Forgive my cynicism, but

(1) the press release identifies Crunchy Conservatives as the type of consumers who shop at Whole Foods (in the first sentence, no less!)

and

(2) you suggest that Crunchy Conservatives should be in the business of telling people how to dress, and in particular, telling them to avoid clothes which signal that the wearer is not upper-class.

It doesn't sound to me like the anti-consumerism runs very deep here.

[Wendy]

Sorry, I missed where Nene said that only upper-class people believe in modesty?

Is that something you believe? Thanks for clarifying.

I see your point about Whole Foods. However, it's rather hard to write a book and document a phenomenon without mentioning any specific references, commercial or otherwise.

Anyway, even crunchies have to buy their food, or at least, the seeds to grow it.

Dreher doesn't argue that commercialism is always bad--just that it has to be balanced by more important values. (It's a means to an end, and not an end in itself.)

At any rate, yes I read the book, and I think he makes a pretty strong case.

Well, have a good weekend everyone--I'm signing off!

[spudmomof6]

I had no idea that I would ever fit a 'hip' definition! I homeschool, grow most of my own fruits and vegetables, wear mostly ordinary clothes, and cook from scratch! Gee, it takes a lot of work to be crunchy...

[lizriz]

For what it's worth, as an aside, I spend a majority of my waking hours pursuing a high-powered, well-paying job, and I've had plenty of time to know myself.

Indeed, it is my deep self-knowledge that empowers me to fight on towards a career goal that may very well take a lifetime to obtain.

[anon]

and then what (lizriz)?

[lizriz]

Then I set a new goal, if I haven't died trying to obtain the current one. It's certainly about the quest and the journey, for me. Fighting the good fight. And I suppose it's important that I want to be a working film/television director, so when it happens, there will be constant challenges and learning everyday. And for the first time in my life, my primary job will be *the* job. Instead of having to work two jobs. And I'll be free of the weekdays/weekends/two-weeks-a-year of vacation system that I find completely inhumane and contrary to what I would prefer, which is weeks of intense, long, focused work followed by many days off at a time. Hello, holiday hiatus!

And then what? Then I get to spend the rest of my life doing what I love: working hard and creating stories.

[Melissa]

I consider myself a crunchy con and though I do have so pretty high career goals, I don't think live should be about fighting through goals. I certainly will give a lot to my goals, but ultimately I want my life to be about more permanant things. My career goals are part of that, since my specialty in my field, economics, is in sustainable agriculture and I hope to be a positive force in that area.. but there is a lot more to life than the rat face.

[Nene]

Thanks for all the comments! Some thoughs:

Anti-consumerism has less to do with where you shop and more to do with how high you place the accumulation of material things in life. Anti-consumerism is basically anti- 'keeping up with the Jones' mentality. I would say that you can be anti-consumerist and a millionaire. Having a lot of $$, working in a high-powered job, or shopping in fancy stores does not necessarily exclude you from being anti-consumerist and being a crunchy con. Like I said crunchy conservatism is a sensibility mainly centered on the beautiful sacramentality of life. There's nothing in this requirement that would suggest that people with a lot of $$ or with high powered jobs could not be crunchy cons- they of course have the ability to appreciate and live a sacramental life.