My last column lamented that the conservative doctrine was under attack from many quarters, even from the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.
Liberals are dancing on the Republican Party’s grave — not just because they see an electoral bloodbath coming, but also because they assert conservatism is an outdated philosophy that doesn’t suit our times. Heartless conservatives have devastated the middle class and created the “1 percent” at the expense of the rest. They keep wages so low that a family cannot sustain itself. Unbridled and hard-hearted capitalism killed millions of good U.S. jobs. Conservative lawmakers keep taxes on the rich and businesses artificially low. While social goods like health insurance/coverage are clearly the right of all Americans, conservatives vociferously oppose President Obama’s Affordable Care Act and similar measures.
Why are conservative principles under such mercilessly sustained assault?
Conservatism is hard to explain and hard to understand. Conservative thought begins with the individual and his God-given rights. Each individual is responsible for her own sustenance, including education, employment and retirement. Indeed, government was formed to secure those pre-eminent rights to the individual. We pay taxes to support government’s legitimate functions like the common defense and securing public safety. Living as we do in the most prosperous society we have ever heard of, conservatives seem stingy and uncompassionate. Why not use our powerful, rich government to aid the poor, homeless and other needy?
This is the great struggle in our body politic: What should be the mission and extent of the social safety net. Conservatives agree that government ought to help those who can’t provide for themselves because of disability, misfortune or old age. Unfortunately, government welfare programs inevitably become “rights” rather than benefits, which tends to incentivize going on welfare over supporting one’s self.
In theory, collectivism (government income redistribution through high taxation and extensive public benefits) is appealing. In actuality, however, the proliferation of welfare programs and their skyrocketing costs are swamping our system. There are not enough workers to pay for welfare programs and other entitlements. Moreover, the collectivist approach overlooks an ironclad rule of nature: after tax rates reach a certain tipping point, workers and investors will generate less income and therefore less tax revenue.
Advocates for government largesse fail to distinguish between personal charity, which one gives voluntarily and accordingly makes sure that it is wisely used, and government hand-outs, which are funded by involuntary taxes that are applied categorically rather than necessarily based on the worthiness of each recipient.
The sheer size and complexity of our economy obscures the remarkable functioning of our markets and the causal connection between free markets and prosperity. As the economy becomes ever more complex, it grows harder to see cause and effect. Conservatives speak in macroeconomic terms, citing the laws of nature and economics that operate over extended periods of time and in ways not completely obvious or easily measurable. Liberals talk of individuals with sympathetic problems in the here and now, and they always win the PR battle.
Another important advantage liberals have is that they have beautiful celebrities stumping for their cause. This makes an incredibly big difference in the public acceptance of progressive solutions.
Conservatives are guilty of unduly resisting scientific findings. True, progressives aren’t always honest about what the science actually says, and a scientific finding tends to come with ready-made solutions that mandate a government remedy. But conservatives must open up to good science.
Conservatives’ solutions tend to be grounded in private effort and individual responsiblity, which are often not immediately discernable nor uniform in response like government programs.
Conservatives’ conflicts with government often grow out of deeply held religious and philosophical views in which government has no role. Their opposition to radical change in social norms is most often based on sincere dictates of conscience rather than on hatred or bigotry. Ascribing the same motives to conservatives that Jim Crow Southerners or Nazis held is usually unfair and in bad faith.
Conservative thinking will be largely vindicated. But the more timely consideration is for conservatives to step forward with real solutions to engage with progressives and all people working in good faith to solve the important issues of our day.
Greg Bell is the current president and CEO of the Utah Hospital Association. He is a former Republican lieutenant governor of Utah.