Showing posts with label conservatism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conservatism. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

The Virtues of Conservatism - Part 10

 After several years of frustration in attempting to convert my liberal friends to a more courageous way of thinking, I have determined three things:
  1. My efforts have been largely futile.
  2. Liberals are converted over time; due to facing critical life circumstances, and/or the recognition that liberal ideology is simply non-enduring.
  3. Derision and name calling does nothing to assist in their conversion.
In light of these revelations, I’ve decided that my efforts might be better invested in discussing the virtues of conservative thought, as opposed to pointing out the blatant fallacies of liberal thinking. Now, this does not mean that I will refrain from comparison and contrast, it simply means that I will attempt to couch my words and observations in non-demeaning ways. Perhaps my words will capture the attention of a young liberal ideologue in his or her journey to a more courageous way of thinking. My discussion will be delivered in 10 parts. This is the last in the series.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 10

The thinking conservative understands that permanence and change must be recognized and reconciled in a vigorous society.  As Russell Kirk writes:  "The Permanence of a society is formed by those enduring interests and convictions that gives us stability and continuity; without that Permanence, the fountains of the great deep are broken up, society slipping into anarchy. The Progression in a society is that spirit and that body of talents which urge us on to prudent reform and improvement; without that Progression, a people stagnate."  

Conservatives, therefore are not hostile toward progression, but instead hostile to progression that would ultimately destroy stability and continuity. May I mention just two here? Marriage and family. Conservatives come by their label for a good reason ... they seek to conserve certain ideas, institutions and practices, not for the sake of simply conserving them, but for the sake of the stability and continuity they provide the individual and society.  During my life-time I have witnessed the liberal left's assault on everything virtuous about the United States; The Boy Scouts, The Traditional Family, The Church,  Unborn Children, Rights Guaranteed by the Constitution, The Free Market System, Private Education, Stay at Home Mothers, Successful Businesses, and indeed Men. Reform?  Progress? ... I'm all for it, as long as prudence and wisdom prevails. Now tell me ... what government program or liberal idea can you name that fits that formula? 

The virtues of the conservative are far superior to any affability the left can drag to the arena of ideas, and it is simple to understand why. The left has no principled position, and without principles their ideas are empty shells. A few examples if I might: Social Security was a failed program from the day it was written into law. The liberals knew it was unsustainable, but strapped future generations with the massive amount of debt it would incur. The war on poverty rages on after 40 years and trillions of redistributed dollars. Guess what? We still have poverty in America, and it's not because we haven't spent enough money on it. It's because some people just wont' work if not required to do so. Medicare and other entitlements have driven our national debt into unforgivable and unsustainable heights. Legalized abortion has now taken the lives of 50 million babies. In a population that big, we surely snuffed the lives of some really remarkable people that never got a chance to demonstrate it.  No one can tell me that conservatives were responsible for these things. I'm old enough to know that these problems were born out of "Progressive" periods in our history...particularly the 60's and 70's, where anything new was superior to anything old. Prudence and wisdom were considered over-rated and decidedly in the way of the leftist concepts of compassion, and political correctness. So excuse my vomiting when I hear how conservatives are responsible for all the ills of the world.
Kirk writes: "The conservative favors reasoned and temperate progress; he is opposed to the cult of Progress, whose minions believe that everything new necessarily is superior to everything old. Change is essential to the body social, the conservative reasons, just as it is essential to the human body ...The great line of demarcation in modern politics, Eric Voegelin used to point out, is not a division between liberals on one side and totalitarians on the other. No, on one side of that line are all those men and women who fancy that the temporal order is the only order, and that material needs are their only needs, and that they may do as they like with the human patrimony. On the other side of that line are all those people who recognize an enduring moral order in the universe, a constant human nature, and high duties toward the order spiritual and the order temporal."  Those who fit the latter description are those I call CONSERVATIVES!


The outline for this treatment is credited to Russell Kirk and the web site at: 
http://www.kirkcenter.org/index.php/detail/ten-conservative-principles/

Saturday, March 3, 2012

The Virtues of Conservatism - Part 8

Conservatives uphold voluntary community and at the same time oppose involuntary collectivism. Conservatives believe that most challenges faced by families and individuals should be addressed at the lowest level of governance possible, that tax dollars collected from them should be used first at the community level,  then at the State level, and finally the national level.  A careful reading of the constitution will bring the reader to one conclusion. Congress is authorized to tax the citizenry for very limited purposes, the single most important being national defense.   
Conservatives hold that  local institutions, churches, synagogs, and the like, are best suited for the purposes of charity, health care, and education ...to name a few. Centralized control of these functions, at the State or national level, offer inviting opportunities for fraud, corruption, and incompetence. In light of current events, do any of those words seem to ring true?  Conservatives maintain that communities understand the challenges of their citizens much better than a distant centralized system, and should consequently be afforded the opportunity and resources to meet those challenges. 
Conservatives vociferously oppose involuntary collectivism, for a host of reasons.
1. Involuntary collectivism shifts responsibility from individuals and communities to a centralized system. Inevitably, the centralized system becomes laden with bureaucracy and inefficiency, leading to the unmet needs of the community and individuals.
2. Underneath involuntary collectivism is the principle of wealth redistribution. This principle presupposes that men and women are perfect, equal in skills/abilities, and share a common sense of justice. We know from history, and from our own experience, that no one is perfect, that we are not equal in our skills/abilities, and what one man make think just, another  may think cruel.  Involuntary collectivism has failed everywhere and every time it has been tried. The early settlers in America tried it, but quickly abandoned it, once realizing its many flaws.
3. Involuntary collectivism steals the dignity from what would be self reliant individuals. 
4. Involuntary collectivism preys upon societies'  talented, successful, and hard working individuals to subsidize, support, or nurture the lazy and irresponsible members of the society.  
5. Involuntary collectivism leads to class envy, discourages entrepreneurship, inhibits workplace creativity, and ultimately destroys economies.  We have only to look at the last 100 years of history to realize this fact. 
6. Involuntary collectivism limits the individual his/her right to pursue happiness, in that the system determines the worth of individuals, and artificially imposes limitations upon them. 
In conclusion, "A central administration, or a corps of select managers and civil servants, however well intentioned and well trained, cannot confer justice and prosperity and tranquility upon a mass of men and women deprived of their old responsibilities. That experiment has been made before; and it has been disastrous. It is the performance of our duties in community that teaches us prudence and efficiency and charity."  Russell Kirk

The outline for this treatment is credited to Russell Kirk and the web site at: 
http://www.kirkcenter.org/index.php/detail/ten-conservative-principles/


Saturday, November 5, 2011

The Virtues of Conservatism - Part 6

Conservatives understand that people are not perfect, never have been perfect and never will be perfect.  In the liberal mind, perfection is possible if the right people and policies are in place. Problem is ... at no time in all of recorded history has this occurred. "But," the liberal will contend "we must always strive for perfection."  Okay. I'll go there, but first you'll have to give me a definition of perfection, and the definition I hear from the left is not sustainable or even one that I like: Government control over commerce, redistribution of wealth, and regulations on fundamental freedoms like speech, property ownership, and thought.  No thank you. I'll live with my imperfect world and keep my God given freedoms if you don't mind.  

Conservatives understand that human perfection is a pipe dream, and that human attempts to create a perfect order are naturally flawed by the simple fact that humans are imperfect. "The ideologues who promise the perfection of man and society have converted a great part of the twentieth-century world into a terrestrial hell." Russell Kirk No, the best we can do is strive for excellence, and the best environment for that to occur is in an environment ripe with freedoms; freedoms Americans have enjoyed since the signing of the constitution. 

The outline for this treatment is credited to Russell Kirk and the web site at: 
http://www.kirkcenter.org/index.php/detail/ten-conservative-principles/

Monday, July 18, 2011

THE VIRTUES OF CONSERVATISM – Part 3 of 10

 After several years of frustration in attempting to convert my liberal friends to a more courageous way of thinking, I have determined three things:
  1. My efforts have been largely futile.
  2. Liberals are converted over time; due to facing critical life circumstances, and/or the recognition that liberal ideology is simply non-enduring.
  3. Derision and name calling does nothing to assist in their conversion.
In light of these revelations, I’ve decided that my efforts might be better invested in discussing the virtues of conservative thought, as opposed to pointing out the blatant fallacies of liberal thinking. Now, this does not mean that I will refrain from comparison and contrast, it simply means that I will attempt to couch my words in non demeaning ways in my observations. Perhaps my words will capture the attention of a young liberal thinker in his or her journey to a more courageous way of thinking. My discussion will be delivered in 10 parts.This being part 2 of the discussion.
 Virtue three in this series deals with the principle of prescription.  In short, conservatives are students of history and typically embrace caution when moving down paths that history has shown to be dangerous or at best fraught with obstacles. Prescription also entails gleaning from history tried and proven customs and mores. "The individual is foolish, but the species is wise," Edmond Burke declared. Conservatives believe the human race has acquired a prescriptive wisdom far greater than any man’s petty private rationality or what might be politically correct or expedient. 
Some salient examples come to mind when we look for ways to applying the principle of prescription. History has shown us that over taxation and over-spending ruin economies. History has shown us that to discourage an activity, the best way to do that is to tax it.  History has shown us that spending more money than is actually in the bank, results in creditors inflicting much pain and suffering until debts are paid.
I don't know if you've been paying attention to the news lately, but some members of congress and the president are in a heated debate over taxation and spending. The conservatives are holding to the principle of prescription, while the president is hell bent on continuing the out-of-control spending.  In fact, had the conservatives not won the House of Representatives in November, they would not even be having the debate. It became apparent to the American public that the policies of the Obama administration were taking us in a direction we did not want to travel. How the Senate escaped the fury of the American voters is beyond me. Be that as it may ... the House republicans were called upon to hold the line in Washington. They are doing exactly what they were elected to do. 
Can we be honest? Why is it that the President and the House of Reps are arguing over the debt ceiling and federal spending? Because Republicans took majority of the House of Representatives in January. Had they not ... we would still be increasing the national debt by 1.5 trillion per year .... the debt ceiling would already be elevated to 105% of GDP, and we would be one step closer to an entitlement state.  I find it interesting that the liberals who call for raising taxes on the rich, as a matter of fairness, neglect to call for  those who pay no taxes start doing so. The principle of prescription; learning from history, shows us that other people's money eventually runs out.
From where I stand, unless we hold to the virtue of prescription, we will be forced to face some perilous and uncomfortable years.

The outline for this treatment is credited to Russell Kirk and the web site at: 
http://www.kirkcenter.org/index.php/detail/ten-conservative-principles/

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

THE VIRTUES OF CONSERVATISM – Part 2 of 10

 After several years of frustration in attempting to convert my liberal friends to a more courageous way of thinking, I have determined three things:
  1. My efforts have been largely futile.
  2. Liberals are converted over time; due to facing critical life circumstances, and/or the recognition that liberal ideology is simply non-enduring.
  3. Derision and name calling does nothing to assist in their conversion.
In light of these revelations, I’ve decided that my efforts might be better invested in discussing the virtues of conservative thought, as opposed to pointing out the blatant fallacies of liberal thinking. Now, this does not mean that I will refrain from comparison and contrast, it simply means that I will attempt to couch my words in non demeaning ways in my observations. Perhaps my words will capture the attention of a young liberal thinker in his or her journey to a more courageous way of thinking. My discussion will be delivered in 10 parts.This being part 2 of the discussion.

The second virtue is that  the conservative adheres to custom, convention, and continuity. Among these customs, conventions and continuity is the long established institution of marriage. Conservatives understand and believe that the re-defining of marriage is a dangerous step toward the break down of the society at large. The arguments that conservatives make are not strictly philosophical. They are indeed practical as well.  Let's analyze the concept of redefining marriage. We must first ask obvious, but surprisingly overlooked questions. Why do we have marriage in the first place?  Where did it start? Who benefits from the custom, convention and continuity of marriage?  If we honestly and accurately answer these questions, we must intellectually arrive at the conclusion that the health of a culture can be largely measured in the resolve of that societies adherence to a strict definition of marriage. Marriage was not, is not, and should not ever be about individuals, but the advancement of a civil and ordered society.

It seems marriage was established in the earliest known forms of civilization, to establish a structure for the rearing of children, to ensure they grow up to be  responsible and productive, and to assist in the daily struggle of survival.  It was families that formed clans, villages and ultimately cultures. If we take the redefinition of marriage to its logical end ... i.e. androgyny, we lose the very fabric of our culture. Maybe that's what some people want. Conservatives think that's not a good idea.  

Last I checked, it takes a male and female to make babies. Most, but not all, babies grow up to be adults who ultimately pay taxes, influence society and contribute to its betterment. So it follows that the society at large benefits from the institution of marriage. You'll have a hard time showing me a culture that has thrived outside of the institution of marriage. To redefine marriage is to dismiss the practical evidence of its importance.

By definition, conservatives wish to maintain those systems, institutions and values that have proven effective. Marriage is at the foundational level of those institutions which conservatives wish to "conserve."  Conservatives can point to history and demonstrate not only the relevance but the necessity for maintaining marriage as a sacred institution. To redefine marriage is to dismiss the wisdom of the ages and pursue a degree of narcissism known only to the most decadent of societies. You see marriage isn't about the needs of the individual ... those can be fulfilled outside of marriage. Marriage is about the needs of society and should be nurtured if that society wishes to survive. Conservatives should stand strong on this issue, for it is foundational to defining our values.

Conservative adhere to custom because it provides a framework for passing along values. Conservative adhere to convention because it provides a structure for making sense of the world, and how best to live within it. Conservative adhere to continuity because it provides the best chance for the survival of the society.  Marriage is the institution that wonderfully exemplifies these three concepts. In the conservative's mind, if you change marriage, you change everything. So, for you liberals who are still reading ... understand we're not going to roll over on this issue. Redefining marriage cannot help our society, so why do it?

The outline for this treatment is credited to Russell Kirk and the web site at: 
http://www.kirkcenter.org/index.php/detail/ten-conservative-principles/

Sunday, January 2, 2011

THE VIRTUES OF CONSERVATISM – Part 1 of 10

After several years of frustration in attempting to convert my liberal friends to a more courageous way of thinking, I have determined three things:
  1. My efforts have been largely futile.
  2. Liberals are converted over time; due to facing critical life circumstances, and/or the recognition that liberal ideology is simply non-enduring.
  3. Derision and name calling does nothing to assist in their conversion.
In light of these revelations, I’ve decided that my efforts might be better invested in discussing the virtues of conservative thought, as opposed to pointing out the blatant fallacies of liberal thinking. Now, this does not mean that I will refrain from comparison and contrast, it simply means that I will attempt to couch my words in non demeaning ways in my observations. Perhaps my words will capture the attention of a young liberal thinker in his or her journey to a more courageous way of thinking. My discussion will be delivered in 10 parts. This is part one.

Virtue One
The cornerstone of conservative thought is the belief in moral order … that there are indeed absolutes. In fact, moral order depends upon adherence to and conformity to certain absolutes. These absolutes are readily apparent, but too often ignored by the non-conservative thinker. I’ll list a few of the most obvious here:

1. There are consequences to behavior, and bad behavior will result in bad consequences. We have evidence of this absolute in our day-to-day existence; drug abuse, theft, murder, etc. Adherence to a moral order attempts to define and defy bad behavior and thereby avoid the bad consequences altogether. Conservatives will be quick to point out that individuals are responsible for their choices and behavior. Spending more money than you earn will eventually result in bad consequences. Ordering hot coffee and then spilling it on your pants is not the fault of the company that sold you the hot coffee. It is a decidedly liberal idea that one can sue the company that sold you what you wanted, but which you improperly handled. The 111th Congress, decidedly liberal, increased the national debt 10 fold in the four years that they held the purse strings. There will be consequences for the out-of-control spending of this liberal group of politicians. Dare I mention abortion; a decidedly liberal doctrine? Killing un-born babies for the last 30 years has certainly had, and will continue to have, an impact on society, whether or not the liberals want to admit it. Behavior has consequences. This is an indisputable truth. It is absolute.

2. Humans will act in ways to insure that their self interests are realized. A moral order is necessary to both restrain their potential indulgences and promote their productivity. Left to their own devices, men would have another man’s property, another man’s money and another man’s wife. It is a moral order that bridals men from engaging in behavior resulting in these outcomes. At the same time a moral order allows men/women to pursue their passions, remain productive and ensure the survival of society. The very rules that inhibit the passions of men are the same rules that promote his productivity and serve to sustain a viable society. Conservatives believe that self determination is superior to communism, where communism forces men to abandon their self interests and work, either in part or in whole, in the interests of others. We will behave in ways that will promote our self interests, This is an indisputable truth. It is absolute. 

3. An inherent sense of justice exists in all rational individuals. A moral order is, in part, a result of men agreeing that individual justice must prevail to ensure a productive society. A sustained and predetermined pattern of injustice corrupts the moral order and can cause men to act irrationally. Conservatives hold that justice is realized when men are rewarded for their honest and forthright use of their time, effort and resources. If a man justly prospers, he should not be penalized for his prosperity. Moral order is violated when men engage in class warfare, embrace racism as a means of advancing personal agendas, or unjustly demonize individuals, organizations or companies. The moral order is violated when governments impose burdensome taxes upon the productive members of its society. The conservative’s interpretation of justice begins with the individual. Social justice is nothing more than a misnomer when the resources of hard working individuals are being confiscated and unwisely distributed. Liberals labeled the TEA party as racists, radicals and bigots, when in truth the members of the movement were simply vocalizing their perception that individual justice was being violated by the Obama administration and the 111th Congress. A sense of justice exists in all men. This is an indisputable truth. It is absolute.

  1. Humans are born consumers and consume until the day they die. This absolute presents the individual three options: 1. Earn the means for consumption. 2. Be gifted the means for consumption. 3. Steal the means for consumption. Conservatives hold that a moral order requires individuals to start earning the means of their consumption at an early date in their personal development. They also understand that children and the handicapped must be gifted their means of their consumption. A moral order also requires punishment for those that would steal their means of consumption. A closer look at this absolute will assist the reader in understanding conservative thinking. In conservative thought, gifting is an individual choice, not one that is imposed upon him. Government has no business determining who is and who is not gifted their means of consumption. If rightly upheld, the moral order will consequently identify those that need gifting and provision for the needy will be rightly administered. Humans are born consumers and consume until the day they die. This is an indisputable truth. It is absolute.

  2. Humans are born with the desire to explore their individualism. Rob individuals of this sense of uniqueness and you rob them of their souls. Conservatives embrace practices, strategies and behaviors that promote this axiom. For example, conservatives encourage competition at a variety of levels; academically, physically, even socially. Conservatives understand that competition is a mechanism which encourages individuals to excel. Yes, there will be winners and losers, because that's the way the world works.  It is liberal thought that systematically eliminated competition from the school playgrounds and Saturday community activities. Conservatives understand that there are inherent risks associated with the practice of individualism; the risk of failure, the risk of rejection, and the risk of being violated or misunderstood. We are born unique individuals, with the capacity to develop different skills, talents and abilities. This is an indisputable truth. It is absolute.

An enduring moral order depends upon societies recognizing and embracing the concept of absolutes. Without absolutes we are left with relativism, which by definition, says that all behavior can be justified.  Conservatives simply adhere to the natural laws that define absolutes, and attempt to live in harmony with them. The liberal thinker does not necessarily reject the existence of absolutes, but will reject their application. For the liberal, equality of outcome is paramount to the success of their agenda. The recognition and adherence to a moral order, defined by absolutes, runs counter to their agenda. In a society ordered by absolutes, some individuals will necessarily be more successful than others. In a society ordered by absolutes, some will necessarily go hungry, remain homeless, be forced to take responsibility for their behavior, and be denied their selfish desires.

The outline for this treatment is credited to Russell Kirk and the web site at: 
http://www.kirkcenter.org/index.php/detail/ten-conservative-principles/