How to Explain Conservatism to Your Squishy Liberal Friends: Individualism 'R' Us

conservativeforum.org ^ | 199? | P.J. O'Rourke

[dark_lord]

Government can't create wealth; only individuals can. All government is able to do is move wealth around.

Like most true statements, this is only generally true. Specific counter examples are:

(1) The development of the interstate highway system with federal funds. This would not have happened without a strong federal government. Yet the positive economic impact upon commercial transport has been massive, which has benefited every business and customer in the supply chain. This is a case where government spending produced a massive net gain.

(2) The development of the Internet. There is much positive commercial impact (ecommerce, using the Web to locate customers and suppliers, etc.) but also a huge impact on our political life. This site, for an obvious example!!!!

(3) By providing strong business supporting laws (support for contracts, prosecution of extortionists, etc.) the government indirectly enables the growth of wealth by providing an environment in which business can prosper -- unlike 3rd world hellholes where all the business benefits are sucked up by the relatives and supporters of the dictator de jour.

[ricpic]

Some grow up. Some don't. It's as simple...and as difficult, as that!

How to keep the large children from wreaking too much damage on the social fabric has always been the problem: A difficult balancing act.

But there is reason to be optimistic. After periods when "rights" take precedence over self-control, the pendulum tends to swing back toward relative sanity. Human society can tolerate only so much acting out.

[The Hon. Galahad Threepwood]

It must be stated that these institutions are currently not to "control" individuals, but to provide a framework within which they teach and convince individuals to control themselves.

I stand by what I said. As the state controls individuals through the threat of fines, imprisonment, or execution, mediating institutions control individuals through the threat of ostracization, dismissal (from a job), excommunication, ridicule, and other punishments less draconian than those the state can mete out.

But if by "currently" you mean that these institutions have now ceased to exercise this necessary control, then I fear you're right.

[Consort]

We have "Six Connons..." and "Six Canons..."; how about "Six Canyons..."?

[FourPeas]

I had the great pleasure of taking a course in conservative thought from Mr. Kirk. He was thoughtful, eloquent and extremely gracious. The impact his course had on me was tremendous. I also recommend reading his book The Conservative Mind.

[ALS]

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship." (such as Hillary types)
-- Alexander Tytler 1747-1813

[Nebr FAL owner]

Sadly I must agree & most of the liberals I know have 4year college degrees.

[E Rocc]

Government can't create wealth; only individuals can. All government is able to do is move wealth around.

Like most true statements, this is only generally true. Specific counter examples are:

(1) The development of the interstate highway system with federal funds. This would not have happened without a strong federal government. Yet the positive economic impact upon commercial transport has been massive, which has benefited every business and customer in the supply chain. This is a case where government spending produced a massive net gain.

I'm not a purist libertarian, and I'll agree that government agencies can handle closed end projects pretty well, like highways, Apollo, dam building, and wars. Where they tend to fail miserably is the open ended projects. They build highways and dams well and Apollo was an achievement, but the highway maintenance, dam power generation, and continuing space programs have been hurt by being run by bureaucracies rather than companies.

(2) The development of the Internet. There is much positive commercial impact (ecommerce, using the Web to locate customers and suppliers, etc.) but also a huge impact on our political life. This site, for an obvious example!!!!

Had the government continued to administer the 'net, its success would have been choked off. Control would have been preferred to expansion.

By providing strong business supporting laws (support for contracts, prosecution of extortionists, etc.) the government indirectly enables the growth of wealth by providing an environment in which business can prosper -- unlike 3rd world hellholes where all the business benefits are sucked up by the relatives and supporters of the dictator de jour.

That is maintenance of order, not the actual creation of wealth. Even the most purist of libertarians will agree that government's tasks include maintaining order and preventing the use of force by private entities in economic situations.

-Eric

[7thson]

Several years ago, I formed the opinion that government should be similar to a referee in a sporting event. How many times have all of us watched a game and see the ref's take control. A good game is when the ref's let the players play and blow the whistle on major infractions. That is how I believe government should be. Let the citizens(players) go on with life(play the game). When major infractions occur(going against the Constitution), the government should take momentary control(blow the whistle). Example - segregation. Goes against the Constitution. Blow the whistle.

[CyberCowboy777]

My post was a except from that great book on Conservative thought.

I envy you that opportunity and apparent pleasure you received. If only all conservatives would take the time to understand.

[Joachim]

Another, long-delayed bump.