In this post I will
continue to share principles which identify a conservative worldview.
Principle #5. Economic Freedom- Free markets
are morally & pragmatically desirable
Economic freedom allows people to pursue their
skills, gifts and talents to the fullest ability. Repressive economic policies (including
excessive taxation) reduce people to a lower state of existence in society; people
become slaves to and for the State as well as forces a subsistence condition on
them. In this condition, people are
forced to become dependent on the State, which simply enables the cycle to
continue. Conservatives understand that ‘central
planning’ leads to oppressive governments and policies and true liberty cannot
exist in such a situation. Conservatives
know that income taxes are an immoral overreach of oppressive government
systems to further control the economics of a society, taking money away from
producers and redistributing it as they see fit, most often to line the pockets
of bureaucrats or doled out to those who refuse to contribute to society. On the whole, free market States are
healthier States.
Principle #6. Pro-Family- Healthy families
as the basis for healthy society
The traditional family unit is the building
block of all society. Statistics show
that single parent homes, especially fatherless homes, produce children with
higher likelihood of societal problems (trouble with the law; substance
abuse). As the concept of family is
redefined, society itself must be redefined, usually with negative
results. Abortion, abuse and euthanasia
are evidences of unhealthy families and thus an unhealthy society. Liberal social commentators bemoan the
conditions in our communities but they are crying about the effects of the
causes they themselves have put in place and support! Under this heading comes the rationale for
the defense of traditional marriage. The
issue is not one of homophobia or some supposed ‘hatred’, as it is certain that
many same sex partnerships exhibit the same care and love as traditional family
units. The issue at hand is a morally
and spiritually based rejection of the assumed authority of modern governments
to define and redefine fundamental human ‘institutions’ which have existed for
thousands of years. Conservatives
welcome the discussion of contemporary issues and allow people freedom of
conscience whereas social liberals demand strict adherence to the new societal
forces.
Principle #7. Evolutionary Social Change- Lasting
social change is a gradual not radical process
This is one area where we might say that ‘evolution’
is positive. Real change takes
time. Revolutions rarely accomplish the lasting
change they hope for. The barbarous
French Revolution of 1789, intended to sweep away monarchy and rule by the few,
gave way to the rise of the dictator Napoleon and, after his defeat, a return
to the very monarchical system it revolted against. The fledgling United States could not retain
the principles of independence it had won and abandoned the Articles of
Confederation for a return to a strong centralized government, similar in ways to
that which it had revolted against. William
Wilberforce labored for decades to outlaw the slave trade before his work saw
success. True Conservatives seek to win
hearts and minds to ideals while leftists and statists seek immediate change
through legislation, coercion and force.
These will never bring true change.
Principle #8. Historical-Social Skepticism- Realistic
appraisal of intentions and results
Because people are sinful, even the purest
motives or intentions are tainted. Conservatives,
whether Christian or not, listen to the promises of politicians and
corporations with a wary ear, understanding that these are in no way pure or
even sincere. Cure-alls and quick fixes
tend to create more problems than they solve, as the long term fallout from FDR’s
‘New Deal’ or LBJ’s ‘Great Society’ have demonstrated in the burdensome welfare
state and the insolvency of Social Security.
The aims may have seemed noble, but unrealistic as solutions. The desire for universal healthcare is good
in its aims; but an oppressive, unwieldy, cumbersome centralized government is
not realistically able to make that desire an effective reality. A friend of mine (who is likely reading this
post) once told me of a certain Washington insider who, when discussing
comprehensive reform, said something to the effect of “we in Washington don’t
do ‘comprehensive’ very well.”
Conservatives know that no product of the human mind can ever be
perfect, even if the intentions and motives are of the highest quality.
So then, considering the current field, is
there any Republican candidate who can truly be called ‘conservative’?
Which now begs the question, should
conservatives vote their conscience, even if we lose an election; or toe a party
line, even if it means forfeiting our convictions?
That’s
a different topic for someday…
Be
blessed
No comments:
Post a Comment