What I'm looking for in a political system is the one that works most effectively and compassionately, regardless of how much compassion the people are feeling as they work within the system.
Let me lay out the foundation of Marvin Olasky's Compassionate Conservatism. This is not an attempt to return to the years of Bush the younger, though America did have a season of resonance with his message. It's more of a declaration that conservatism need not and should not yield the label of "compassionate" to liberals and progressives who primarily find their solutions and salvation in the government.
The U.S. economy continues to crumble under the weight of socialist ideals. That alone should show the emptiness of the government's claim to offer compassion. But this downturn is not shocking and we had better not lose the clarity of it's report: socialism doesn't work.
That message is starting to hit home, but what do we replace socialism with? If we stop charging toward centralized government power and financial control, where do we charge to next?
Marvin Olasky's version of conservatism needs to be considered. Yes, we can chew the meat and spit out the bones, but there's plenty of meat to be had. Let me outline his ABCDEFG principles.Seven Principles of Compassionate Conservatism
(Compassionate Conservatism, pp 16-20)
Assertive
The preamble to the Constitution speaks of government promoting the general welfare but not providing it. Alexis de Tocqueville was astounded to see Americans forming associations to fight poverty and other social ills rather than waiting for government to act. Such assertiveness surprised to Europeans well into the 20th century.... compassionate conservatism is the opposite of how wimpy doctrine; it emphasizes a renewable of the Citizen assertiveness that so impressed the first great for a journalist to come here, de Tocqueville.
We're seeing this sort of assertiveness in the TEA Party movement of the last 18 months. There is a very real sense that the people still have a voice to remind our political representatives who is working for whom! In a free country, the government fears the people more than the people fear the government. This assertiveness is both historic and uniquely special in this time and place.
"When the government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny." - Thomas Jefferson
Explain to me, please, what the Dow Jones has to do with a socialist government or compassionate conservatism.
ReplyDeleteThe Dow Jones dropped 6,000 points under President Bush. The Dow Jones is supposed to reflect the economy not the socialist ideology of the government. Seven months after President Obama took office the DJIA had risen 2,000 points and since then the Dow Jones has recovered another 3,000 points while Obama has spent a trillion dollars, saved car companies, boosted troop levels in Afghanistan, saved Wall Street, and added healthcare for all. Where is the cause and effect? There is no comparison.
Wall Street needs regulation because it cannot control itself. The same can be said about Congress and Presidents.
RC, nice to hear from you again. Looking dapper as always.
ReplyDeleteIt's an interesting time period, the one you describe with the dip and rise of the stock market. Here's my take:
"Capital markets are forward-looking. The Dow Jones Industrial Average usually rises and falls based on expectations of what will happen, not based on what’s happening right now. In other words, if stocks fall, it is because investors believe the future is looking bleak, not because the present state of the economy is bad."
That explains the plunge of the DOW leading up to Obama's early days as president. Then Obama and the Democrats started the process of artificially inflating the economy with exorbitant and wasteful stimulus spending. It's a house of cards.
Socialism's big three policies on Obama's early agenda: healthcare reform, financial regulatory reform, cap and trade. The insertion of the government and specifically the executive branch into healthcare, energy and finance is a tremendous centralization of power. Whether or not that power is dangerous in Obama's hands, it will be dangerous in somebody's.
And the expansion of government in America is taking us down the same path as the collapsing socialist European states.
"Sounds like in Greece the inmates must be running the asylum. Except America has the exact same problem. California, New York, New Jersey and Illinois are our very own homegrown versions of Greece. These states are bankrupt, insolvent and desperately need a bailout. Why? For the same reasons as Greece. Far too many government employees; bloated salaries for civil servants; bonuses and raises are contractually obligated even during an economic crisis; sky high pensions; and jobs guaranteed for life. The only difference is that we are a nation of 300 million, so the debt is far bigger than Greece. It turns out that we are Greece squared."
That's all I got for tonight RC. Hope your new week starts out well tomorrow.
"Socialism's big three policies on Obama's early agenda: healthcare reform, financial regulatory reform, cap and trade."
ReplyDeleteWhat is the difference between big government and socialism? It appears that you see no difference but there is.
Do you see a difference between federal regulation and federal approval? It appears that you see no difference but there is.
If you think that Obama is a socialist, please explain why Obama did not nationalize the banks during the financial crisis when economists said he should. If you think that Obama is a socialist, why do you think that he bought toxic assets from capitalist banking firms? If you think Obama is a socialist why do you think Obama did not nationalize the car companies? Why did Obama take stock ownership in them instead?
Obama follows Bush on human rights, American policy abroad, and expanding the war on terror into Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Obama is no socialist. He is BIG government like Dick Cheney and Halliburton and no bid contracts. He is BIG government like Bush and citizen surveillance. He is Big government like Paul Volcker and pumps trillions of dollars into private financial companies.
Obama is no socialist. He does not seek to acquire the reins over industry and production. He does not seek to break free enterprise like the Marxists or Communists or even like Western Europe.
I am confident that I will not like most of Obama's decisions. But it has nothing to do with socialism and it has everything to do with expansion of federal authority over states and citizens. The same issue exists with Republicans as it does with Democrats.
Who will reform Congress and the Supreme Court and the Executive Branch? Who will reform the major political parties feeding at the federal trough? One goes for guns, the other for butter. Who will change this?
But again Obama is not a socialist. He does not seek to control the economy, production, or companies. Each time he gets involved , he uses BIG government to settle things not to make them over into a socialist model of how to run a country.
Food, shelter,healthcare, and clothing are basic human needs. Not a socialist ideology.
RC, what offends you about the term socialism? Do you find this Wikipedia description fair?
ReplyDelete“Socialists generally share the view that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital and derives its wealth through a system of exploitation. This in turn creates an unequal society, that fails to provide equal opportunities for everyone to maximise their potential, and does not utilise technology and resources to their maximum potential nor in the interests of the public.”
While there are many types of socialism and many contexts, most progressives/liberals who I listen to would agree with everything in that paragraph. I think the offense comes at comparisons with Hitler and other socialist dictator types.
I see America's track more in line with the European socialism of today. There have been some benefits to those countries, but the piper is now asking to be paid.