Right-Wing Conservative Republicans
Now that it’s voting season I’m starting to see the political fireworks show. When I hear political advertisements, I’d like to think most of them are not effective as they levy gross generalizations and distorted truths against the other side. But then, I notice something: we’ve been doing this for so long that there is an entire class of people out there that don’t know the foundations on which the criticisms are based. Or those that “made up their minds” did that so long ago, the might not realize how the political world has changed in the last 50 years. So I’d like to take a moment to dissect the “Right-Wing Conservative Republican” as I recently heard this implied in a negative way.
What it is: Well, this part is easily explained. The “right” believe that although all people may be created equally and deserve the same opportunity, not all people are inspired equally or make the same decisions and effort in life to prosper equally. This results in varying degrees of success and prosperity which is an inherent fact of human life. The more right-wing you are, the more you believe that people have the right to succeed or fail at their own risk and choosing. The opposite of right-wing would be to attempt to make all people equally prosperous by various methods such as: redistribution of wealth, unequal taxation, and heavy use of social programs.
Why do we need it: In a right-wing world, there would be a real risk of failing in life that will cause suffering of some sort. That risk would motivate most of society not to fail as they measure “that’s good enough” in their accomplishments. Conversely, the result of hard work would be rewarded with prosperity. That reward will motivate the rest of society to perform well as they think, “I can do more”. Those left as non-motivated individuals would be the “what’s left” of society that need consideration. Unfortunately, the extreme right-wing has little to offer here other than to slide a little left on the left/right scale. Normal human beings do not want to see suffering of any type and it just becomes a question of: At what point is social welfare appropriate? Right-wing folks would agree that a severely mentally-challenged person is appropriately supported in part by the public as it can be too much for a single family to bear. The right-wing support of public assistance diminishes as you have a less compelling case to make.
Extreme Example: If someone is supposedly unable to be successful in life, if the penalty for failure is to be thrown into debtors prison where you will only get bread and water in solitary confinement, the human spirit will take over and find a way. (Where there’s a will, there’s a way.)
What it is: This part I think is the most misunderstood. Conservative means the preservation of the good parts of history and tradition. Conservatives believe that if intentional efforts are not made, “moral decay” is the natural progression of human nature and society. Conservatives want to make that intentional effort to slow (and sometimes reverse) moral decay. What is moral decay? It’s what causes us to move as a society from Elvis dancing on stage to Miley Cyrus “twerking” on stage. It’s what causes shows like “Leave it to Beaver” to be a thing of the past replaced with “Family Guy”. Some argue morale decay is what allows the biblical term “marriage” to actually be redefined in the English language dictionaries. Those are social examples. A financial conservative is appalled by not passing a federal budget since that would be not respecting tradition and the time-tested rules of fiscal responsibility.
Why do we need it: If a conservative today could wave a magic wand and fix only one “problem”, it would likely be the problem of the broken family. Various social conditions fail that cause broken families – which in return cause poverty, child neglect, and a new generation that is even worse on the “moral decay” scale. The social conditions that contribute to a failed family: premarital sex, having a child out of wedlock, a high divorce rate, taxes that penalize marriage, and a culture of selfishness. All of these issues have been historically kept more in check by social pressures – the social pressures that Liberals of today diminish. Find a case of poverty today and almost certainly you will not see a functional family unit supported by the previous generation’s family units. When a conservative sees an example of a single-parent with children in poverty, they remember how their own parents taught them not to have premarital sex, how a gentleman was expected to ask the parents for their daughter’s hand in marriage, and how to protect your good name in the community and church. All of those traditional safeguards had a purpose; a purpose that reduces the chance of being a single-parent in poverty. Liberals of today seem to want to blend the words “Christian Conservatives” or “Evangelical Conservatives” to make a point. Conservative is conservative; and religion (morals) is naturally a big part of that – even if the majority of those embracing religious value are Christian.
Extreme Example: Imagine a world where morality/tradition is thrown out the window and it is socially and legally acceptable to do whatever feels good or is convenient. How does humanity thrive in that environment?
What it is: A Republican should appreciate our country as a Republic more than a Democracy. A republic means a Constitution exists that limits government. Most Republicans of today believe government has grown too big and oppressive. (This is what attracts those that say they are “Tea Party”.) Democrats believe more in majority rule; and government is a tool to serve the majority at the expense of the minority. Maybe a little more controversial comparison to make, Republicans more focus on government serving the people and Democrats see more people supporting the government. (It’s the same glass half-empty/half-full but it’s the philosophy behind it that is the differentiator.)
Why do we need it: Look at the debt clock and the government’s inability to stop it from ticking upwards. Look at how many times the President of the United States says “we’ll get to the bottom of this” and seemingly is incapable of doing so. Look at what the government can do now to monitor who you talk to and who you e-mail. Look at how many taxes you pay: employment tax, income tax, social security tax, Medicare tax, Medicade tax, State Income tax, sales tax, property tax, motor vehicle tax, hotel occupancy tax, consumption tax, gasoline tax, alcohol and tobacco tax, and the list goes on. Republicans are increasingly concerned that the government is too big and no longer serves the people as much as the people serve the government. Republicans look toward the Constitution as what should be limiting government (protecting We The People) more. Democrats like to say Republicans serves the rich when the truth is that Republicans want to serve everyone equally – it’s just the “rich” that have more to lose/gain than the rest of us.
Extreme Example: Imagine a world where the US Constitution is merely an old document that might only suggest what is proper and does not really constrain government. What will government eventually do to its subjects?
Put it all together and what is the perfect “Right-Wing Conservative Republican” world look like?
Government starts to shrink in size and power. This in turn reduces our debt and eventually our taxes. Some entitlement and social programs (some of which spoiled us using the country’s credit card) will be eliminated. People return more to the church and family for support and social programs. As a result, the family unit is strengthened and the next generation appreciates more family value than the previous generation. A renewed American spirit is developed that emphasizes “personal responsibility” and everyone doing their part. (As opposed to everyone paying their fair share.) It would be very much described as JFK did when he said, “Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.” That sure is a Right-Wing Conservative Republican kind of thing to say! What has changed in the last 50 years since perhaps your parents or grandparents taught you to vote the way you do? No longer can you trust the simple “R” or “D” after a political candidate’s name.
There’s a perfect “Left-Wing Liberal Democrat” world as well. As I’m not of that persuasion, anyone else want to take a whack at what that perfect world looks like?