Thursday, January 15, 2009

Focusing on the wrong end

I keep hearing it from the Republican so-called leadership who are hijacking the party into moderate materialism... "We need to focus on the financial conservatism and jettison the social conservatives... so that we can reach more people." They have their tactic completely and totally backwards. If anything, we need to do completely the opposite. I'd go so far as to say that if I had to choose between social or financial conservatism, I would choose social.

Did anybody reading this also read George Orwell's Animal Farm? I recommend it. Right now I am thinking of a specific character in the story, a pig named Snowflake. In the story, the farmer is chased from the farm and the pigs set up a socialist government that turns brutally totalitarian by the end. Snowflake, chased off and killed eventually by the power-seizing Napoleon, is a 'gentler dictator' and genuinely works towards the good of the other animals. He may be an economic liberal, but he acts as a social conservative, and does not seem to govern his own life by the mantra that you do what you can to secure your own power and satisfy your own pleasure. He is not a moral relativist.

I will never truly believe that socialism is the best way for a country to operate, but I would rather have a good dictator than a society left adrift and manipulated by evil men. Even government-mandated programs for the poor is better than a set of undisciplined rich men who sneer at and oppress those beneath their income levels. Indeed, in a morally-corrupt culture, a firmer hand is needed. Liberty is for adults, not children.

If we truly work for the good of our society, we must focus on morality, even above freedom. If our sons and daughters are not raised in such a way as to be willing to give up power voluntarily, what will it matter when we send them into public office with their heads full of capitalism? We will end up with tyranny of a different sort.

Those who prize economic conservatism above social conservatism will create a land so undisciplined and brutal that socialism will be needed eventually just to hold man's passions in check. Those who prize social conservatism will create a land in which government power holds no fear for the citizens and can be lowered over time by those who have not grown to love power.

We are headed for a time of increases socialism under Obama, but we can still train ourselves and teach our children to be people of moral standing, who not only understand, but feel that lying, cheating, and stealing is plainly wrong. That is the only way we will continue to be worthy of the economic conservatism we so badly want back!

3 comments:

  1. The Problem with Socialism - and any system that takes away the freedoms of its people for their own good, as it were - is that there is no way to regulate the man at the top of the pyramid.

    Being Moral is all well and good my friend - and infact is *extremely* important, as it is the basis for many, many things.

    But believing that government can impose morality, anymore then it can fix an economy, is foolish.

    Better one lives in near or true anarchy, then a social dictatorship. For while the first may have the best interests of his people at heart... the second, third and future rulers may not - and once you hand that power away - taking it back is very difficult, for the first thing any smart dictator does, is he disarms his populous.

    At least in an anarchy - one must learn to live with his neighbors, lest they tire of him and drive him off, or worse - kill him.

    ReplyDelete
  2. And... with further comments now that I thought about it for a couple minutes - The Republican leadership - (of which I do not follow, not being a Republican) is in the foolish belief that conservatism - both social and fiscal is losing them elections.

    Fiscal conservatism is extremely important, but is only useful in conjunction with social conservatism, from a long run perspective.

    You cannot have one, without having the roots of the other. They go hand in hand, because conservatism is a lifestyle. One with many facets and faces, but a lifestyle none the less.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Just to be sure you understand my point here... :) I'm talking about conservatives focusing on morality in an increasingly socialist government that pushes amorality, in the interests of being worthy to govern when we finally take it back.

    As opposed to the moderates' claim that we should dump the morality to get more votes.

    ReplyDelete