Compassionate Conservatism.
President Bush has made much about Compassionate Conservatism.
Not many people understand what Compassionate Conservatism is about. Even conservatives miss the point more often than not. Leftists say it is just a slogan, those on the right say it means more government spending. Sadly I believe the Leftists have a point.
The point of campassionate conservatism can be found in two paragraphs from the President's Inaugural Address (January 20, 2005)
In America's ideal of freedom, the public interest depends on private character [emphasis added] - on integrity, and tolerance toward others, and the rule of conscience in our own lives. Self-government relies, in the end, on the governing of the self. That edifice of character is built in families, supported by communities with standards, and sustained in our national life by the truths of Sinai, the Sermon on the Mount, the words of the Koran, and the varied faiths of our people. Americans move forward in every generation by reaffirming all that is good and true that came before - ideals of justice and conduct that are the same yesterday, today, and forever.
In America's ideal of freedom, the exercise of rights is ennobled by service, and mercy, and a heart for the weak. Liberty for all does not mean independence from one another. [emphasis added] Our nation relies on men and women who look after a neighbor and surround the lost with love. Americans, at our best, value the life we see in one another, and must always remember that even the unwanted have worth. And our country must abandon all the habits of racism, because we cannot carry the message of freedom and the baggage of bigotry at the same time.
In America and in the West in general the ideal of compassionate conservatism is best exemplified by those working on their own to solve a problem or to aid someone in need. The left sees most problems as problems to be solved by government intervention and tax increases, the right sees private initiative as the way to help others. The problem is those on the right often agree then say they are too busy to help out. This opens the door for those who would push for governmental intervention and that means restrictions upon our liberty.
In the two paragraphs the President is not calling for government programs he is calling for us to switch off American Idol and find a social problem to fix, a person in need of help, or some other noble calling.
IMO, a part of the problem resides in Libertarianism and in Randism and streaks of those two philosophies do influence Conservatism. Libertarian philosophy, IMO, stresses individualism too much it does not give sufficient recoginition to the fact we do depend on each other. No matter what our abilities are, our work-etheic, and our luck we all need others to help us advance in life. This in no way minimizes a given individual's responsibility for their own actions and their own success but we all have seen the brilliant boor who may be as smart as the dickens work like a son of a gun but makes little headway because they offend those around them.
If Libertarianism is bad on this Randism (aka Objectivism) is completely out the window. I like some things Ayn has to say but her ideas tend to lead people to this idea as "self as supreme" and everyone can succeed and to forget about those who can not. Helping others is not just a "warm-fuzzy" (as a buddy who is a Rand fan characterizes volunteerism).
In the presidency of Ronald Reagen there was a funny story about a letter he recieved. It was a from a little boy whose mother declared his bedroom a disaster area and ordered him to clean it up. The little boy wrote the President to request federal assistance and Ronald Reagan denied the request advising the little boy to convince his friends to form a group to tackle the problem on their own. Indeed!
Not many people understand what Compassionate Conservatism is about. Even conservatives miss the point more often than not. Leftists say it is just a slogan, those on the right say it means more government spending. Sadly I believe the Leftists have a point.
The point of campassionate conservatism can be found in two paragraphs from the President's Inaugural Address (January 20, 2005)
In America's ideal of freedom, the public interest depends on private character [emphasis added] - on integrity, and tolerance toward others, and the rule of conscience in our own lives. Self-government relies, in the end, on the governing of the self. That edifice of character is built in families, supported by communities with standards, and sustained in our national life by the truths of Sinai, the Sermon on the Mount, the words of the Koran, and the varied faiths of our people. Americans move forward in every generation by reaffirming all that is good and true that came before - ideals of justice and conduct that are the same yesterday, today, and forever.
In America's ideal of freedom, the exercise of rights is ennobled by service, and mercy, and a heart for the weak. Liberty for all does not mean independence from one another. [emphasis added] Our nation relies on men and women who look after a neighbor and surround the lost with love. Americans, at our best, value the life we see in one another, and must always remember that even the unwanted have worth. And our country must abandon all the habits of racism, because we cannot carry the message of freedom and the baggage of bigotry at the same time.
In America and in the West in general the ideal of compassionate conservatism is best exemplified by those working on their own to solve a problem or to aid someone in need. The left sees most problems as problems to be solved by government intervention and tax increases, the right sees private initiative as the way to help others. The problem is those on the right often agree then say they are too busy to help out. This opens the door for those who would push for governmental intervention and that means restrictions upon our liberty.
In the two paragraphs the President is not calling for government programs he is calling for us to switch off American Idol and find a social problem to fix, a person in need of help, or some other noble calling.
IMO, a part of the problem resides in Libertarianism and in Randism and streaks of those two philosophies do influence Conservatism. Libertarian philosophy, IMO, stresses individualism too much it does not give sufficient recoginition to the fact we do depend on each other. No matter what our abilities are, our work-etheic, and our luck we all need others to help us advance in life. This in no way minimizes a given individual's responsibility for their own actions and their own success but we all have seen the brilliant boor who may be as smart as the dickens work like a son of a gun but makes little headway because they offend those around them.
If Libertarianism is bad on this Randism (aka Objectivism) is completely out the window. I like some things Ayn has to say but her ideas tend to lead people to this idea as "self as supreme" and everyone can succeed and to forget about those who can not. Helping others is not just a "warm-fuzzy" (as a buddy who is a Rand fan characterizes volunteerism).
In the presidency of Ronald Reagen there was a funny story about a letter he recieved. It was a from a little boy whose mother declared his bedroom a disaster area and ordered him to clean it up. The little boy wrote the President to request federal assistance and Ronald Reagan denied the request advising the little boy to convince his friends to form a group to tackle the problem on their own. Indeed!
posted by Marcus Aurelius at 9:34 AM
<< Home