I think there is a great deal of misunderstanding among those, especially those on the left side of the political spectrum, who call me a conservative. Please, do not lump me in with those who support the Republican Party or President Trump; as those are not what I consider to be true representations of conservatism; and I’ll get to my definition a bit later.
People today align themselves along what they believe to be either conservative or liberal ideologies; and they vote for candidates from the party which they believe best forwards those ideologies. I know I’m going to upset a great many on the political left, but I believe their logo, or motto if you will, should be; I prefer to live in a society where people are equal in slavery over one in which they are unequal in liberty.
A large part of the liberal ideology is that those who have more should be required to pay more in taxes so that our government can, in turn, redistribute that money to those in need. This shows a woeful misunderstanding of the purpose for which our federal government was established. Our government was not established in 1789 to be the caregiver and provider of all things to the people. Instead, it was primarily established to be the mediator between the sovereign entity that were the States and the protector of all from external attack.
As our system was established all those years ago, the burden and responsibility for providing for the needs of the people fell upon the State governments, not the entity which is our federal government. If one were to read through the arguments for the creation of our federal government they would find that two of the primary reasons the Federalists felt the need to establish a stronger central government were; first, the inability of the federal government to effectively regulate commerce, and secondly its inability to collect the taxes needed from the States to fund its operations.
By regulating commerce our Founders did not mean that the government could force people to purchase things they did not want to purchase, or control every aspect of a products production; rather they meant that all restrictions or hindrances to the free flow of goods from one point to another within the Union be removed; so that trade could flow freely from one end of the country to the other. Now the Commerce Clause has been perverted to expand the powers of government to all manner of mischief.
This whole, the more you make the more you should be required to pay, philosophy permeates liberal thinking. Take for instance labor unions, the bastions of liberalism in America. I have little use for labor unions, but am required to maintain membership in one where I work. Why is it that should I decide to bid on another, higher paying job, that if I get it my union dues will go up? If I decide to move up the company ladder into a higher paying job is the union going to provide me any better service than it is to those making less than I am? If it provides the same service to a highly skilled and highly paid mechanic as it does to someone in an entry level position, why do they charge MORE in union dues for those making more?
Look at vehicle registration fees. If I drive a 1967 car my registration fees are going to be substantially lower than those someone driving a 2017 car will pay. Why; does someone driving a newer vehicle get more bang for their buck?
Why is it that so many believe that if you make more you should be required to pay more in taxes? Should that not entitle those who pay more to receive more in government services, and those who pay less to receive less?
The entire platform of those professing a liberal ideology shifts the responsibility for ones actions from the individual to society. It is best summed up by saying, if one person screws up, pass a law which affects everyone; if one person is in need, create a program that takes from everyone who produces and gives to those in need.
How anyone cannot see that this breeds slavery and destroys individual freedom is beyond me.
And I’m not giving the Republicans a free pass either. Both parties use the apparatus that is government as a tool to benefit specific portions of society. The Democrats use it to benefit those causes which they believe bring about social justice, while the Republicans use it to benefit big business.
Think about it, what would happen to the military industrial complex if our government pulled our troops out of every country they were stationed in and brought them home ONLY to defend the U.S. from attack? What would happen to all those companies whose sole existence depends upon military contracts for their survival if the government used the military in the manner it was intended we have an Army and a Navy for?
The same goes for Big Pharma; look at how they are intertwined with the Food and Drug Administration, allowing government to decide what is legal, and what is illegal in the treatment of disease. How much money would Big Pharma lose if it were made known that cancer could be prevented by a few simple lifestyle changes and a diet consisting of certain naturally occurring substances? The cancer industry is just that, an industry; and industries exist for one purpose only; to make a profit. They do not want to cure cancer, no matter how much they say they do; they would lose billions if they found a cure for it. They want to manage cancer; treat those who get it and justify the existence of all these cancer clinics across America.
The liberals in America, as much as I oppose their position on the issues, are at least honest in who and what they are. These so-called conservatives on the other hand are not. They go about calling themselves conservatives when they are simply seeking to use government in different ways to benefit others; this time the others being big business.
To me a conservative is defined as one who best promotes the individual liberty of every man, women and child in America. I oppose anyone who seeks to deprive me of my rights or the fruit of my labors to benefit anyone else. I do not care if you tax me to fund programs which provider services to the poor or those in need of healthcare, or if you tax me to fund endless wars which make military contractors rich. To me there is no difference between the two; you are taking my money, or depriving me of my rights, to benefit a select segment of society.
America was founded upon one single principle, the idea that people held certain unalienable rights and that governments were instituted to protect those rights. But rights are like a coin; on the one side you have the right, and on the other there is the responsibility that comes with each right. Take for instance the freedom of speech. Any person anywhere is free to say whatever they want, so long as they do not harm the reputation of another; such as in cases of libel or slander. Yet today certain things, certain images or beliefs are considered politically incorrect, or offensive; therefore the freedom to say or express one’s self is being restricted because others cannot handle what is being said.
Our right to own guns is being attacked because certain individuals abuse that right. So society demands that stricter gun laws be enacted which restrict the people’s right to own certain classes of weapons. This shows me that people do not understand WHY we even have a 2nd Amendment. It was not so we could HUNT, it was so we could defend ourselves against our government.
These people’s hearts may be in the right place, but they miss the point for which our government was established and why certain rights were protected from infringement. Daniel Webster once said, “Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions.”
I don’t care who you are, or what your beliefs are, the reason why our Founders established our federal government should be paramount in your decision making process, not how your party can use government to benefit a specific class of citizens.
In his Inaugural Address Thomas Jefferson provides us with his definition for ‘good government’, “…a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.”
In 1791 Founder James Wilson wrote, “Government … should be formed to secure and enlarge the exercise of the natural rights of its members; and every government which has not this in view as its principal object is not a government of the legitimate kind.”
Our government, over the course of its existence, has gone from one which sought to preserve freedom to one which seeks to destroy it. It has gone from one that exercised a few specific powers for the benefit of the nation as a whole to one which exercises an endless list of powers designed to benefit the broad spectrum of society.
The two political parties are things which give you the illusion that we still have a Republican form of government because we still have the ability to go to the polls and choose between Republicans or Democrats. Yet the truth is both parties no longer produce candidates who seek office for the reasons our government was established; they only seek to further their party’s agenda.
Does it matter if the boot on your neck is on the left foot or the right when it still is choking the life out of you? Why should it matter then if the party which is depriving you of your freedom goes by the name of liberal or conservative?
Someone told me last night in a Facebook post that we should hold our politicians to a higher standard than we should the general public. I think this person has it backwards. I think we should hold ourselves to a higher standard. How can we expect those we elect to have higher standards when the pool from which they come from is polluted? If we do not have any standards, how can we be expected to choose a candidate who does, or even recognize one when they appear on the political stage? One look at how both the political right and left treated Ron Paul ought to be sufficient to prove that point, as he was the closest thing to a true conservative we’ll ever see again, and we, for the most part, rejected his message.
If we want to fix what’s wrong in America we need to begin with the individual. We need to maximize the freedom of the individual and at the same time hold each of us accountable and responsible for our own life. We can either choose the path which leads to true freedom or we can choose the path which leads to equality in slavery, but we can’t have both.
And the sad thing is, as long as we continue to play that two party paradigm we are doomed to stay on the path which leads to slavery.