Well, yes of course the conservative camp nowadays is highly partisan (we're witnessing that right now as even radical rightists such as washed-up rocker Ted Nugent throw their support behind faux-conservative presidential candidate Mitt Romney), ideologically insular (in both the sense that their ideology insulates them from reality within a political mythos in which an agenda that includes breaking labor unions, deregulating capitalist greed, perpetuating corporate welfare, doing away with the social safety net, and now defunding Planned Parenthood is portrayed as being aimed at the greater good; and in the sense that conservative ideologues close themselves off to the ideas and insights of the left, reacting against our ideas and insights as if they're quite anathema) to the point of being dogmatic and bigoted, and of course its members are characterized by a common underlying mentality (whose features are SDO [social dominance orientation]; authoritarianism; a tendency to moralize; what I refer to elsewhere as a siege mentality; and, in the case of Christianist conservatives, religious exclusivism).
However, despite their tendency to circle the party's wagons, to erect and hide out together behind certain ideological ramparts against reality, and to share a common psychological profile, conservatives and their movement aren't at all monolithic. Their unity is not sufficient to preclude diversity, such as it is. That is, at one end of the rightist spectrum we find what I'll term fascist conservatives (needless to say, no American conservative actually identifies with the epithet "fascist", but it's still accurately descriptive of a certain ilk of "conservative"), such as the folks on the religious right who yearn to impose their morality and theology on the rest of us, as well as others who would like to use the power of government to politically ramrod society in a rightward direction. And, at the other end, we find so-called "libertarians", who quixotically dream the impossible dream of a free market utopia in which capitalists all honorably play by the rules even though they're thoroughly deregulated and freed up to behave like egoistic individualists, and working-class folks live happily ever after without any government protection or social safety net.
And, in between these two ideologically antipodean poles on the ole spectrum we find many individuals who are a mixed bag of the tendencies of both extremes. For instance, individuals who may be both "cultural conservatives" who are in favor of a much bigger government role in our private lives (i.e., they'd like to crackdown on homosexuals, ban abortion, and post the Ten Commandments in public schools) and free-marketeers (!); or conservative individuals who are socially liberal but still staunchly opposed to the very notion of a progressively activist government. Etc.
Well then, it's not at all news to me that conservatives and right-libertarians have their issues with each other, and that some don't even classify libertarians as "conservatives". But nevertheless they are, rightists. That is, as I've already mentioned, they share the same fundamental mentality. Say what?! How can I say that libertarians and fascist-type conservatives share the same defining mental characteristic?
Well, I can because they both do. Namely, SDO, social dominance orientation. But isn't a "libertarian" by definition above reproach for having a dominance-oriented mentality? Actually, no he/she isn't. For what the typical right-libertarian really is is an egoistic individualist who very much has social dominance on the brain, in the sense that he's hyper-concerned about being subjected to someone else's social dominance (the focus of his hyper-concern of course becomes the big bad government); and in the sense that he vicariously identifies with and idolizes uber-rich capitalists, our society's equivalent of dominant males, aspires to join their ranks, and dreams of living in a society in which he and his fellow capitalists would have carte blanche to pursue economic and social dominance.
Libertarian ideology and rhetoric masks this largely subconscious dominance-orientation, but certainly doesn't suppress it, just listen to some "vulgar libertarians" (as Kevin Carson calls them) engage in adulation of the alpha capitalists whom they relate to far better than their fellow working-class Joes and Janes. And, conversely, listen to how they disparage the poor and the homeless in very Nietzschean terms, so to speak, as worthless untermenschen who deserve no form of welfare assistance. It's not at all mere hyperbole to say that lurking within the brains of libertarians is a little Neanderthaloid homunculus who admires society's dominance-possessors (i.e., capitalists), holds the less-fortunate in contempt as inferior losers, and wishes to be left alone to ruthlessly strive after success, superior status, and social powerfulness.
Yep, libertarianism is just a big ole political construct that intellectualizes the libertarian's will-to-dominance into something lofty-sounding, and that wish-fulfillingly expresses the libertarian's vision of a society in which one is at licentious liberty to be an unabashed alpha capitalist. Needless to say, the fascist also has a dominance-oriented mentality, which he/she wishes to express by capturing control of the apparatus of the state and using it to force his/her politics, morality, and religion on all of us. The Christianist conservative, for example, would like to exercise cultural and social control by legislating our morality in regard to women's issues, homosexuality and marriage equality, genetic research, etc. This, forcing his/her agenda for a Christian society on us, is merely a sanctimonious way of seeking and enjoying dominance.
In either case, whether one is a libertarian seeking to create a ferally dog-eat-dog "free market" in which one is free to play the capitalist alpha dog lording socioeconomic dominance over underdog workers, or one is a fascist fundamentalist trying to win the culture war and make the rest of society cater to his/her Bible-based bigotry, either way one's politics merely reflect and seek to reify one's core dominance-oriented mentality. So, the upshot is that I very much can answer the question "How can I say that both libertarians and fascists share the same rightist psychological makeup?" as I did before going into a bit of detail, by simply flatly stating the fact that they do, share an emotive-cognitive constitution distinctly colored by SDO.
So much about the conservative mind-set is explained by this psychiatric diagnosis, as it were. For instance, the staunchness and dogmatism of conservatives is in large measure a manifestation of the dominance-oriented mentality's will to be right and to impose its point of view. And the moralism of conservatives, well, this is both a way of enjoying a sense of superiority and an avenue to social dominance, for he who forces his/her morality on his neighbor, even benevolently, is after all asserting his/her will and control. Moralism also provides a nice pretext and cover for one's dominance tendencies, making it possible to express them and to push one's agenda without being recognized and dismissed as a crude dominance-monger.
But, as I've observed, none of this prevents the existence of some measure of intellectual and ideological diversity among wingers, so yes, the inability of some libertarians and conservatives to recognize their psychological kinship is to be expected.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
