The difference between liberals and conservatives (Thomas Sowell & Sarah vs. Obama & Co.)

I just finished reading Sarah Palin's excellent book (number one on the New York Times bestseller list), "Going Rogue - An American Life." In one of the last chapters, I came across a passage in which Palin references the writings of Thomas Sowell. Thomas Sowell is a well-known syndicated columnist and academic economist. He is also a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institute at Stanford. Palin writes about Sowell's book "A Conflict of Visions." In this publication, Sowell explains how "visions" shape our opinions and the way we look at social and political issues. Sowell calls these visions the "unconstrained" and the "constrained." Palin elaborates a bit further on Sowell's definitions. After reading what both authors have to say about the political views in our country and what helps to shape them, I had to share a few paragraphs with my readers.

"People who adhere to the unconstrained vision (the label applied to them is "liberal" or "left-wing") believe that human nature is changeable (therefore perfectible) and that society's problems can all be solved if only the poor, ignorant, disorganized public is told what to do and rational plans are enacted. And who better to make those plans than an elite bureaucracy pulling the strings and organizing society according to their master blueprint? No one can doubt that our current leaders in Washington subscribe to this unconstrained vision.

Conservatives believe in the "constrained" political vision because we know that human nature is flawed and that there are limitations to what can be done in Washington to "fix" society's problems. Commonsense Conservatives deal with human nature as it is - with its unavoidable weaknesses and its potential for goodness. We see the world as it is - imperfect but filled with beauty. We hope for the best. We believe people can change for the better, but we do not ignore history's lessons and waste time chasing utopian pipe dreams.We don't trust utopian promises from politicians. The role of government is not to perfect us but to protect us - to protect our inalienable rights. The role of government in a civil society is to protect the individual and to establish a social contract so that we can live together in peace."

Liberals believe that human beings are basically good (unless you are a conservative or Republican). While that may be nice and sweet, it simply is a very childish notion and is not true. Evil does exist . There are evil people out there. Liberals believe that everyone can be changed to behave a certain way - the way that liberals want them to be. This will be achieved with the help of government - big government. Government needs to dictate to us how we should live our lives! Liberals believe that with the guidance of those who know best - like Barack Obama & Co., people can become peaceful, loving, generous, etc. Everyone will be equal - in all aspects of life. Many of us realize that this wish is not grounded in reality. It is an immature pipe dream. All people are not benevolent, desiring to help others, and kind-hearted. Many people are evil or lazy or self-centered, and could care less about their fellow man. Many people refuse to abide by the rules of society. And they will not change. Our prisons are full of such people. Criminals. Terrorists. Those who kill and harm others without a second thought. Who try to take from others what they haven't earned (oops! that could describe the government under Barack Obama....). Who do not follow the laws and rules of society and have no desire to - no matter how hard the so-called "compassionate" liberals believe in the undiscovered goodness of such evil ones. In the same breath, liberals are the ones who continue to show more compassion for criminals than their victims. Who tend to be disenchanted with America and critical of our superior standing in the world. America is a great country, yet many on the left do not want to acknowledge this. Our own president seems happy to bash the United States and apologize for what he perceives to be all our wrongs. Why no optimism about America? Why not champion the positives, rather than try to tear our country down? And therein lies a big difference between conservatives and liberals.

Conservatives realize that there are good AND evil people in the world. People cannot be changed to fit a certain idealized mold of peace and flowers and smiley faces that some in society envision. People are individuals - with opinions, likes and dislikes. Different interests, desires, and goals. Like Sowell states: "human nature is flawed." Conservatives accept this and realize what needs to be done to ensure a safe and prosperous society. Laws to protect the innocent and that punish the guilty and remove them ala prisons so law-abiding citizens are safe. We believe in the ability the any individual can achieve great things when left to their own devices. We believe that less government is best. The government needs to get out of the way and allow us to prosper. We also desire a strong national defense, and for that we realize the government should be working to make sure America remains the strongest country on the planet. And, of course, another theme that conservatives strongly support - cutting taxes. We also believe in the greatness of America. We realize we live in the best country on the planet. We have faith in ourselves as individuals. As Ronald Reagan once stated, (and Sarah Palin quoted in her book): "America was more than a place in the world; it was a world-changing idea, founded on principles that had weathered many storms." Many Americans still adhere to these very principles - and are fighting right now against our own government and president to keep these principles alive!

Sadly, at the present time, we have a president and administration that is intent on making the American people more reliant on government. It seems as though not a day passes when Obama & Co. aren't trying to enact some legislation that will raise taxes, require citizens to depend on government for health care, ruin our economy, put us more in debt, and force citizens to pay more and lose more rights due to the farce known as "global warming." Thankfully, the politicians in Washington D.C. will soon be leaving on their Christmas (oops! gotta be politically correct here) "Holiday" break. At least when they are out of Washington D.C., the American people have a breather from having to endure more ridiculous bills and socialistic ideas being shoved down our throats at a rapid pace. Does the White House even know what it is doing anymore? Obama and Co. seem to be trying to do everything at once - and none of it well. Chaos -at home and abroad.

The four best gifts this "Holiday" season that the American people could receive from Obama would include:

3) Send the number of troops to Afghanistan that General McChrystal originally asked for in order to really get the job done and win! (Maybe Obama could even say the word "win!" What a stance for the Commander-in-Chief to take!)

4) Stop spending money we don't have - (especially on all those earmarks that Obama promised he wouldn't allow in legislation.). The first "Stimulus Bill" was a disaster. It didn't work. Anyone with any economic sense knows that one cannot spend more money they do not have to get out of a recession. Stop ensuring that generations of Americans will be saddled with massive debt for decades.

I believe that Conservatives have more faith in their fellow human beings than liberals do. Liberals seem to think that way too many people are helpless and just cannot make do for themselves. They believe reliance on the government is the answer. And in trying to assist them by providing for their every need (through taxpayer dollars) - they are perpetuating a life of dependency. Which actually seems to be encouraged these days, since it tends to result in more votes for the Democratic party....Liberals and Democrats want Americans to be reliant on the government.

Conservatives like myself hold true to the idea that every person has an equal opportunity to achieve their goals in life. Every person is an individual - with different ideas, abilities, intelligence, and experiences. How they put their talents to use is up to them. What choices they make in life are their choices. We do not want to have to rely on the government to tell us how to live our lives and provide for us. We do not want a nanny state. This belief is quite the opposite of what we see happening in our country right now.

Now before all the usual liberals who comment on my blogs blow a gasket, I am not saying that conservatives do not believe in lending a helping hand. We do. We believe in helping those who have fallen on hard times. We believe in donating to our favorite charities and having the choice of donating to our favorite charities. The government doesn't provide us, as taxpayers, a choice as to how we want to help our fellow man. The government in every case is just a "middle man" - taking from the taxpayers and blurring the lines of where the money really goes and how it is really used. Time after time we read and hear about social welfare agencies absconding with funds. Spending taxpayer dollars meant for the poor on themselves and lavish lifestyles. Cut out the government. Let us give directly to the charities of our choice. And it is interesting to note that studies have shown that conservatives and Republicans give more money to charities. Just like Democrats falsely claim to have cornered the market on promoting civil rights (it was the Republicans that made the major efforts to pass civil rights legislation), Conservatives and Republicans do more for those who have less than Democrats and liberals. Yet another one of those pesky facts that the mainstream media doesn't care to point out.

This is a good spot to link to one of my all-time favorite columns. It's by Dennis Prager several years ago, and it's still up on townhall.com (although the formatting stinks because the paragraphing is gone). It's well worth the read.

If You Believe That People Are Basically Good

There was a thread here on FR about this article when it was first published.

Conservatives believe in the "constrained" political vision because we know that human nature is flawed and that there are limitations to what can be done in Washington to "fix" society's problems. Commonsense Conservatives deal with human nature as it is - with its unavoidable weaknesses and its potential for goodness. We see the world as it is - imperfect but filled with beauty.
I think Professor Sowell would deny that conservatives (of which he is one) "see the world as it is."
The entire point of his discussion of "visions" was that nobody "sees the world as it is" without imposing an imperfect template on it.
Tho he might agree that a conservative politician who must lead must perforce take the bull by the horns and behave as if their vision and reality are largely coterminous.

Personally I see liberals and conservatives as seeing good AND bad in opposite ways.

Liberals think people are all “children” who cannot do anything for themselves, and are otherwise innocent.

Cons think most grown-ups are capable of caring for themselves, but can be childish in the worst way.

It’s a bit more complicated than that. As I read through Liberal Fascism, it’s becoming clear that some people are simply “bored” with life and need to be part of an emotional and religious movement, except that they have replaced God with the State (though plenty of earlier Progressives were theocratic, like Woody Wilson.)

Then there’s the whole desire to dominate and shape the world (and people) around them, which unites both progressive ‘liberal’ and communist. I would actually suggest that progressive libs, fascists and commies don’t really believe that people are ‘good’ but they have an unyielding faith in their ability to MAKE people good. And they only believe in collectivism to accomplish this because otherwise there are those who exist outside the State (or whatever is forcing people to work as an organic political entity with one will) and that undermines their idea of a unanimous society.

People must remember that one of the main goals of Marxist theory in its application was that man would no longer need to worry about working to survive, we would have total control over our environment, nature and that somehow (never makes sense) our wishes would then conform with the overall general interest of our fellows.

The left and some in the right(though very few) have succumbed to the notion that individualism is base or unenlightened and that freedom isn’t you being left alone but you having the “resources” or knowledge to express and live fully (who knows what this actually means, because you never really see it lived out—it’s a religion, again—who can describe Heaven?)

The stateists hate the Word of G_d, because they believe they are him.

Ask one of them what part of the 10 commandments they hate most?

Better yet, ask them what part of "love your neighbor, as yourself" they hate.

They believe BG can "change" our "sinful" ways.

They are of course wrong.

Outstanding commentary.

My lefty relatives ask me how such a nice person as myself can be a Republican. They’re all poisoned on Kool-Aid. If they read Sowell’s, Sarah’s and your comments, they’d glaze over. They have as much ability to comprehend as Ben Nelson had to do the right thing and Kill the Bill.

Well actually, they think that human beings are malleable. Basically good, but in need of “education.” The same view that forces 9th graders and 12th graders to abide by the same rules, thereby preventing many students from maturing, is applied to a whole society. The Communists turned the state into a huge prison; our liberals would make it a huge school, where we all remain under the thumb of our schoolmasters.

I don't disagree with the article, but I'd add that, while recognizing human fallibility and especially the fallibility of government, conservatism is the more optomistic and even utopian philosophy.

Individualism and limited government gives the freedom for individuals and groups, and, therefore, society, to evolve and progress. Statism and big government takes away that freedom, under the assumption that without elite command and control, by force of arms, men and society will not progress.

I think of "liberals" as the cynics, not conservatives.

From a religious point of view, conservatism grounded in Judaeo-Christian values accepts life as a divine gift, and men as created in the image of God. This implies that free men can aspire to life in accord with Natural law, God-given law. Atheistic communism assumes none of this, and treats men essentially as animals, requiring domination and control.

I think the Christian precept of original sin also gives conservatives a healthy scepticism of human made laws, unlike "liberals" who seem prone to recognizing no limits on their governmental impositions. See Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao, et al.

I don't think most libs are closet Marxists. The majority of them are like Bill Clinton: they're opportunists. They're probably Dems for certain issues like unions or abortions. Then like a lot of people they suddenly like all the other issues their side is for. What they promote is certainly disastrous and more than a few Dem congresscritters have leaned so far left, they can be called socialists. Those are the ones in the Progressive Caucus.

But never attribute to cunning what you can attribute to stupidity or base greed. The great majority of Dems and even Dem congress-people would never live under the conditions they advocate. They want others to do so...as long as it doesn't threaten their own pampered lifestyles. Which is why the biggest hypocrite of them all, Al Gore, lives on a huge estate and flies on expensive jets. He has no intention of living like the Unabomber. He's just power hungry and deranged.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.