I’ve said before that I think the main reason there hasn’t been more teahadist terrorism is that most teatards are too old to get off the Barcolounger and blow shit up. But what if you could you be a terrorist without leaving the comfort of your own home, simply by causing a massive government default?
I know there are many moderate, pro-business conservatives who feel the same way about a government default that I do. Some have written about this quite eloquently — Howard Baker and the guys at OTB, for example. I mean no disrespect to them when I say this: for many conservatives, catastrophe is a feature, not a bug.
Polls have shown that most conservatives say they don’t think default would be a big deal. I think the embrace of default goes deeper than that, though — even if default is cataclysmic, that cataclysm could be an opportunity to put the country back on the right track. Many conservatives are truly revolutionary and would embrace a Franco-style dictatorship as long as it promoted a commodity-backed currency, low taxes, and the proper reverence for Reagan/Rand/Burke/Jeebus/Founding Fathers, while abolishing sexting, deconstructionism, welfare, and low-rise jeans.
It’s not just teatards, either, it’s neocons too. You think Bobo wouldn’t trade democratically elected officials for a $50 Edmund Burke coin?
No one wants to admit this, people want to say that the only reason conservative aren’t afraid of default is that they think it’ll just cause a day or two of long lines at the ATM. The truth is, many of them want a revolution, by any means necessary.