Dump Conservatism, Save the Republican Party
Dale Netherton
March 31, 2006
It is common knowledge the Republican Party is in trouble. They may lose their majority in either one or both of the houses of Congress and the Republican President is stumbling badly. And what has been the overriding movement within the Republican Party that has brought forth such a calamity? In a word, "Conservatism." Just as the “philosophy” of Liberalism killed the Democrats, now the equally false alternative of Conservatism has the Republican Party gasping for breath and hoping to find a scrap of plausibility to cling to before they go under. Both parties made a bad mistake by attaching a label to their beliefs instead of formulating a workable platform they could articulate and promote. They each vaguely attempted to attach themselves to values they knew were important to their constituency as they undermined their message with promises that could never be kept.
The Liberal Democrats soon found that their tax and spend philosophy was impractical and unacceptable to the voters. Bill Clinton announced ”the end of big government” and proposed program without end at every speech he made. The traditional message of smaller government by the Republicans disappeared with a “compassionate conservative” dropping food behind enemy lines, running up deficit after deficit. expanding the government with a costly prescription drug coverage plan, conducting a Truman like Korean war with no end in sight and for answers relies on a stubbornness that dismisses any approach that might actually work. An undefined label leaves a lot of flexibility for wandering and that is why we have liberal conservatives all over the place. No one knows what is a true conservative or liberal but they both throw stones if there is any slip in stature they can attack.
The Conservative movement was designed to plead to the religious with an addendum to the platform that included traditional limited government spending. And as a result the first thing we saw was a faith based fund from government challenging the very principle of the need for separation of church and state. The tax cut was a visible delusion after you look at the debt that ensued from the spending. If you owe the government more than you ever did ,a refund of current payments does not translate into an increase in net worth. And say what you will, if our country is going broke, so are the citizens.
Conservatism in reality died with Barry Goldwater. He latched onto the label as an alternative to the burgeoning spending of the Liberals. But as the Republicans found out, they couldn’t win without a spending program. They simply lied in their campaigns what they really stood for in the hopes that once they got into power things would be different. The frantic grab for political power at the expense of principle lead by none other than talk show host Rush Limbaugh exposed the approach to be nothing other than the implementation of liberal spending policies under a conservative label. Those listening to Rush prior to the 2000 election will remember his encouragement of this approach to get the Conservatives into power by out democratizing the Democrats. As the results show, it was a poor approach and gave us power hungry Republicans without principle to stand on. Republicans have always been vulnerable to the accusations of Democrats that they were mean spirited and stingy so they showed them. They showed them they could be just as fiscally irresponsible as any Democrat. What a display of character.
For those still hanging their star on political conservatism, it is time to take a hard look at the results and the antics that have brought about a stampede of disarray. Playing the political game of trying to get the government to violate individual rights in the name of some other cause and a perceived short term benefit is a ploy of both the liberals and the conservatives. Either spokesperson will only lead us into tyranny and/or bankruptcy or both. So what is the way to reverse this scramble for more power to do more damage. If too much power is the problem, then less power is the solution.
It’s time to forget the labels of Liberal and Conservative and recognize that both of these movements have lead to the same approach and achieved the same unsatisfactory results. It is time to identify and promote a much more fundamental way of describing one’s political philosophy. The central issue is individualism versus the anti-individualists who want the government to take away individual rights, redistribute wealth to gain political favoritism and control via decree. The individualist party would first of all stand on principle, the primary principle being the individual rights of man summed up in the Declaration of Independence as the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. These rights would be explicitly framed and clearly defined. They would be the bedrock of a constitution that would rest solely on reason and not be amendable from its founding principe of individualism. This constitution would outline the actions and limitations of the government. It would exclude the government from the world of production and trade leaving it in the limited role of an agent of restricting and preventing the initiation of force against individual citizens. It would be restricted to the extent it could not indulge in behavior it was created to prevent and retaliate against. It would truly be a limited government.
See http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=7389 for the reasons behind the need for a limited government.
Clinging to the old is an attribute of conservatism and being open to the new is an attribute of liberalism. You can see from these characteristics that originally defined these stances how far the drift has been. The old was the separation of church and state the country was founded on and the rejection of that by the conservatives shows they were not interested in that if it would not get them political power. The progress of the liberals was a rehash of the failed socialistic “experiment” of Soviet Russia which was not a new idea at all. Both of these labels are bankrupt as all false ideals must eventually be.. The Republicans can revive their party by clamping onto what’s left of their original mandate of limited government. The Democrats can revive their party by innovating a solution that leads to a recognition of individual rights. But with the present crop of politicians we have only the power seekers to turn to for what promises to be nothing more than the attempt to make the same old bromides work for one more election. And the American Public can react as they do to all things boring and turn apathetic. For if there is no choice, there is no reason for enthusiasm and/or participation. And then the real thugs will come out from their rocks and promise anything with results that would be unthinkable today. For just as nature abhors a vacuum so too does a nation drift into chaos without a firm well defined destination. That destination will only be a road to achievement and opportunity if it is not blocked by the vermin would seek dominion over men.
A politic that protects man to live and produce can sustain itself. A politic that destroys that component upon which civilization depends is doomed to the fate of oblivion. This is why liberalism has faded to a hard left minority and why Conservatism has shown that it was but an illusion. It must be dumped by the Republicans if they are to relive the political prominence they are on the verge of losing. It is the core of their difficulties and like the Democrats they are crying ,“ Anything but that”. Can politicians learn? There is not much evidence they can. The life they have chosen was no doubt chosen for an opportunity to do good. The good they chose to do and the results, should demonstrate the good does not come from political power designed and implemented to destroy individual freedom. Taking and giving whether by a Liberal of a Conservative is an evil that must be recognized and remedied. And that requires a rethinking on a major scale. For those who will wail , “We never saw it coming” the excuse must fall on their own blindness. So as the Republicans wonder why they too are susceptible to political failure let them look on what brought them to prominence and the flaws it contained. Compassion in war and conservatism for progress are not winning strategies in either field of endeavor. For the Republicans to emerge again, Conservatism must go.
The Liberal Democrats soon found that their tax and spend philosophy was impractical and unacceptable to the voters. Bill Clinton announced ”the end of big government” and proposed program without end at every speech he made. The traditional message of smaller government by the Republicans disappeared with a “compassionate conservative” dropping food behind enemy lines, running up deficit after deficit. expanding the government with a costly prescription drug coverage plan, conducting a Truman like Korean war with no end in sight and for answers relies on a stubbornness that dismisses any approach that might actually work. An undefined label leaves a lot of flexibility for wandering and that is why we have liberal conservatives all over the place. No one knows what is a true conservative or liberal but they both throw stones if there is any slip in stature they can attack.
The Conservative movement was designed to plead to the religious with an addendum to the platform that included traditional limited government spending. And as a result the first thing we saw was a faith based fund from government challenging the very principle of the need for separation of church and state. The tax cut was a visible delusion after you look at the debt that ensued from the spending. If you owe the government more than you ever did ,a refund of current payments does not translate into an increase in net worth. And say what you will, if our country is going broke, so are the citizens.
Conservatism in reality died with Barry Goldwater. He latched onto the label as an alternative to the burgeoning spending of the Liberals. But as the Republicans found out, they couldn’t win without a spending program. They simply lied in their campaigns what they really stood for in the hopes that once they got into power things would be different. The frantic grab for political power at the expense of principle lead by none other than talk show host Rush Limbaugh exposed the approach to be nothing other than the implementation of liberal spending policies under a conservative label. Those listening to Rush prior to the 2000 election will remember his encouragement of this approach to get the Conservatives into power by out democratizing the Democrats. As the results show, it was a poor approach and gave us power hungry Republicans without principle to stand on. Republicans have always been vulnerable to the accusations of Democrats that they were mean spirited and stingy so they showed them. They showed them they could be just as fiscally irresponsible as any Democrat. What a display of character.
For those still hanging their star on political conservatism, it is time to take a hard look at the results and the antics that have brought about a stampede of disarray. Playing the political game of trying to get the government to violate individual rights in the name of some other cause and a perceived short term benefit is a ploy of both the liberals and the conservatives. Either spokesperson will only lead us into tyranny and/or bankruptcy or both. So what is the way to reverse this scramble for more power to do more damage. If too much power is the problem, then less power is the solution.
It’s time to forget the labels of Liberal and Conservative and recognize that both of these movements have lead to the same approach and achieved the same unsatisfactory results. It is time to identify and promote a much more fundamental way of describing one’s political philosophy. The central issue is individualism versus the anti-individualists who want the government to take away individual rights, redistribute wealth to gain political favoritism and control via decree. The individualist party would first of all stand on principle, the primary principle being the individual rights of man summed up in the Declaration of Independence as the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. These rights would be explicitly framed and clearly defined. They would be the bedrock of a constitution that would rest solely on reason and not be amendable from its founding principe of individualism. This constitution would outline the actions and limitations of the government. It would exclude the government from the world of production and trade leaving it in the limited role of an agent of restricting and preventing the initiation of force against individual citizens. It would be restricted to the extent it could not indulge in behavior it was created to prevent and retaliate against. It would truly be a limited government.
See http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=7389 for the reasons behind the need for a limited government.
Clinging to the old is an attribute of conservatism and being open to the new is an attribute of liberalism. You can see from these characteristics that originally defined these stances how far the drift has been. The old was the separation of church and state the country was founded on and the rejection of that by the conservatives shows they were not interested in that if it would not get them political power. The progress of the liberals was a rehash of the failed socialistic “experiment” of Soviet Russia which was not a new idea at all. Both of these labels are bankrupt as all false ideals must eventually be.. The Republicans can revive their party by clamping onto what’s left of their original mandate of limited government. The Democrats can revive their party by innovating a solution that leads to a recognition of individual rights. But with the present crop of politicians we have only the power seekers to turn to for what promises to be nothing more than the attempt to make the same old bromides work for one more election. And the American Public can react as they do to all things boring and turn apathetic. For if there is no choice, there is no reason for enthusiasm and/or participation. And then the real thugs will come out from their rocks and promise anything with results that would be unthinkable today. For just as nature abhors a vacuum so too does a nation drift into chaos without a firm well defined destination. That destination will only be a road to achievement and opportunity if it is not blocked by the vermin would seek dominion over men.
A politic that protects man to live and produce can sustain itself. A politic that destroys that component upon which civilization depends is doomed to the fate of oblivion. This is why liberalism has faded to a hard left minority and why Conservatism has shown that it was but an illusion. It must be dumped by the Republicans if they are to relive the political prominence they are on the verge of losing. It is the core of their difficulties and like the Democrats they are crying ,“ Anything but that”. Can politicians learn? There is not much evidence they can. The life they have chosen was no doubt chosen for an opportunity to do good. The good they chose to do and the results, should demonstrate the good does not come from political power designed and implemented to destroy individual freedom. Taking and giving whether by a Liberal of a Conservative is an evil that must be recognized and remedied. And that requires a rethinking on a major scale. For those who will wail , “We never saw it coming” the excuse must fall on their own blindness. So as the Republicans wonder why they too are susceptible to political failure let them look on what brought them to prominence and the flaws it contained. Compassion in war and conservatism for progress are not winning strategies in either field of endeavor. For the Republicans to emerge again, Conservatism must go.
Print
Email
