Boss
Take a Memo:
Could Boss have possibly lost his mind? What the hell, man? How can he possibly explain this argument? It appears to completely fly in the face of conventional wisdom and is a contradiction of terms. How can Conservatives be Socialists? Well, this is what we shall examine in this OP.
First, let's clarify a few things. Socialism as we know it, is an ideology. It is the notion that top-down government control of things is more beneficial to the people than private sector control. Conservatism is not an ideology, it is a way of thinking, a philosophy rather than ideology. It is the belief in pragmatic time-tested solutions which have proven to provide results. Therefore, a Conservative can indeed believe in pragmatic socialistic remedies for particular problems, if the socialistic remedies are effective and work.
We often hear liberals chortle about roads, police, fire departments, snow plows... all being "socialist" yet widely supported and embraced by all in society, including Conservatives. This is true, and I will add a few more things as well; our military, Supreme Court, Congress, and the Constitution itself. All of these things are "socialist" in that, they deal with the collective as opposed to the individual or private sector.
So what is the Conservative beef with Socialism? Well, it's the ideology itself. It is the false belief that any and all things are better under a socialistic system. Some things are better but some things are not. Many things, particularly regarding our freedom and economy, are better handled through private enterprise, free markets, respectful of individual liberty. Conservatives believe this because history has proven them to be true. Some socialist measures work precisely because free market capitalism enables them to work.
Let's take the fire departments for example. Governments don't just assume the role of providing protection against fires. Communities get together and raise revenue through mutual taxation to fund a fire department. There has to be private sector capitalism happening first, to enable a tax base by which a portion can be used to fund a fire department. If there is no private sector capitalism happening, where does the money come from to pay the firemen or buy equipment?
The same thing can be said of roads, police, schools and snow plows. Without the capitalist engaging in free market trade, there is no tax revenue to fund these things. So a purely socialistic society cannot work because governments have no means of income production. We know this is true because of history, it was attempted under Chairman Mao Zedong in China. He believed that society could share the burden of production for a centralized government who would ensure everyone was cared for adequately without the need for capitalism. The experiment resulted in dismal failure and the deaths of over 50 million people.
What happens is "human nature." Without capitalism, the people who are supposed to be providing the means of production become demotivated. There is no reward for working harder. It becomes the motivational goal to simply do what is required and remain alive. Because there is no capitalistic push or drive, this eventually results in shortfalls and the people discover there is not enough to go around. Meanwhile, those who are in charge of distribution have full access to resources and they tend to look out for number one. Over time, the system devolves into two classes: The Ruling Class Elite and the Peasant Class.
As people, we have needs and wants. A "need" is something that is required, a "want" is something that is desired. They are two different birds. A free market capitalist free enterprise system, which the Conservatives believe in, can provide the financial underpinning for those things which general society needs. This is where "general welfare" comes in. Those things which we can all agree are needed by all, that benefit all of us in society, and we can use tax revenues to collectively pay for and handle without much burden to the individual. Yes, that is socialistic, but there is nothing wrong with it.
The problem is when socialistic ideology spills over from our "needs" to our "wants" and attempts to provide cradle-to-grave entitlement. It's the pollyannish thinking that we can somehow give everyone everything their hearts desire and the wealthy can somehow pay for it all. Since the wealthy obviously have a finite amount of wealth, this road has a dead end at some point. Besides, the wealthy are mostly motivated by capitalism, and when you begin providing everyone with everything their hearts desire, you effectively kill capitalist motivation. Why work hard and earn wealth when everything is being given to you? If your needs have been met and you have no wants, then there is little to motivate you.
Conservatives are Socialist, in that they do believe in certain measures to ensure societal needs are met, but they believe this is better accomplished through free market capitalism, generating economic prosperity and growth, producing capitalist revenue which can be used collectively to handle those needs. It is through the freedom of capitalism that we believe it is possible to have limited socialist systems to cover these needs. Not only do conservatives believe it is better, we believe it is ultimately the only thing that works.
First, let's clarify a few things. Socialism as we know it, is an ideology. It is the notion that top-down government control of things is more beneficial to the people than private sector control. Conservatism is not an ideology, it is a way of thinking, a philosophy rather than ideology. It is the belief in pragmatic time-tested solutions which have proven to provide results. Therefore, a Conservative can indeed believe in pragmatic socialistic remedies for particular problems, if the socialistic remedies are effective and work.
We often hear liberals chortle about roads, police, fire departments, snow plows... all being "socialist" yet widely supported and embraced by all in society, including Conservatives. This is true, and I will add a few more things as well; our military, Supreme Court, Congress, and the Constitution itself. All of these things are "socialist" in that, they deal with the collective as opposed to the individual or private sector.
So what is the Conservative beef with Socialism? Well, it's the ideology itself. It is the false belief that any and all things are better under a socialistic system. Some things are better but some things are not. Many things, particularly regarding our freedom and economy, are better handled through private enterprise, free markets, respectful of individual liberty. Conservatives believe this because history has proven them to be true. Some socialist measures work precisely because free market capitalism enables them to work.
Let's take the fire departments for example. Governments don't just assume the role of providing protection against fires. Communities get together and raise revenue through mutual taxation to fund a fire department. There has to be private sector capitalism happening first, to enable a tax base by which a portion can be used to fund a fire department. If there is no private sector capitalism happening, where does the money come from to pay the firemen or buy equipment?
The same thing can be said of roads, police, schools and snow plows. Without the capitalist engaging in free market trade, there is no tax revenue to fund these things. So a purely socialistic society cannot work because governments have no means of income production. We know this is true because of history, it was attempted under Chairman Mao Zedong in China. He believed that society could share the burden of production for a centralized government who would ensure everyone was cared for adequately without the need for capitalism. The experiment resulted in dismal failure and the deaths of over 50 million people.
What happens is "human nature." Without capitalism, the people who are supposed to be providing the means of production become demotivated. There is no reward for working harder. It becomes the motivational goal to simply do what is required and remain alive. Because there is no capitalistic push or drive, this eventually results in shortfalls and the people discover there is not enough to go around. Meanwhile, those who are in charge of distribution have full access to resources and they tend to look out for number one. Over time, the system devolves into two classes: The Ruling Class Elite and the Peasant Class.
As people, we have needs and wants. A "need" is something that is required, a "want" is something that is desired. They are two different birds. A free market capitalist free enterprise system, which the Conservatives believe in, can provide the financial underpinning for those things which general society needs. This is where "general welfare" comes in. Those things which we can all agree are needed by all, that benefit all of us in society, and we can use tax revenues to collectively pay for and handle without much burden to the individual. Yes, that is socialistic, but there is nothing wrong with it.
The problem is when socialistic ideology spills over from our "needs" to our "wants" and attempts to provide cradle-to-grave entitlement. It's the pollyannish thinking that we can somehow give everyone everything their hearts desire and the wealthy can somehow pay for it all. Since the wealthy obviously have a finite amount of wealth, this road has a dead end at some point. Besides, the wealthy are mostly motivated by capitalism, and when you begin providing everyone with everything their hearts desire, you effectively kill capitalist motivation. Why work hard and earn wealth when everything is being given to you? If your needs have been met and you have no wants, then there is little to motivate you.
Conservatives are Socialist, in that they do believe in certain measures to ensure societal needs are met, but they believe this is better accomplished through free market capitalism, generating economic prosperity and growth, producing capitalist revenue which can be used collectively to handle those needs. It is through the freedom of capitalism that we believe it is possible to have limited socialist systems to cover these needs. Not only do conservatives believe it is better, we believe it is ultimately the only thing that works.
