Read on Twitter
One of the most egregious ways that many folks who call themselves "conservatives" misunderstand conservatism is a consistent (and likely willful) misinterpretation of freedom and its unavoidable cost: individual responsibility.
Of the foundational elements of conservatism, individual responsibility has always been indivisible from another conservative ideal: freedom of individuals.
(Sometimes I wonder if that tired Spider-man trope shouldn't be modified: "With great freedom comes great responsibility.")
When you are free to decide, and to act on those decisions, those actions always precede a corresponding reaction. This is an immutable law of nature. Action—Reaction. Cause—Effect.
Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that if conservatism champions the idea of freedom, it must also accept its child: consequence.
Because you are an autonomous being who initates acts, traditional conservative philosophy is that you also bear a responsibility for any subsequent and corresponding reaction.
You see this most effectively applied in the way that conservatives treat poverty as though it is evidence of the decisions made by individuals. Conservatives believe it is *the individual's fault* that they are poor, because their decisions and acts have obviously made them so.
Conservatism posits that it is incumbent upon the poor to take corrective steps to alleviate their poverty (should they so desire), and that only they should be forced to bear the burden of these acts. Effectively, they choose to be/remain poor.
A cognitive dissonance, therefore, must exist in order for these same "conservatives" to bristle at the notion that they could/should bear any kind of *negative* consequence for choosing (a freedom) to not wear a mask when out. (All consequences should be positive, presumably?)
Potential consequences for exercising this freedom are:
The potential for a fine
Denial of service (by other individuals who you would presume should also be afforded the same freedom of choice)
Social shaming/ostracization
The potential for a fine
Denial of service (by other individuals who you would presume should also be afforded the same freedom of choice)
Social shaming/ostracization
Note that these consequences are not certain. Some folks may choose not to wear masks and not put themselves in situations where any of those outcomes occur. Or, they may interact with folks who don't care. This is, of course, acceptable to them.
I would even argue that conservatives who choose not to wear masks *and* choose not to put themselves into situations that may result in the above consequences do actually understand and practice conservatism effectively/consistently.
It's the cherry-picking "conservatives" who are problematic Champions of Freedom™. The ones who latch onto all the aspects of the ideology that benefit them while reacting like petulant children at the required accountability.
That the possibility, or the experience of these consequences befalls them, well. That is just intolerable, don't you know. It's unfair! It's a violation of their freedom!
Honey, when you choose to go out into the world (free choice #1) without a mask (free choice #2), you already done exercised your freedom. This is simply the cost of freedom, because, ironically, freedom ain't actually free. The rest of us get that, so why don't you?
