The Conundrum for Conservatism
Barack Obama wants to raise taxes and I’m not even sure he knows why. When confronted with the fact that lowering the capital gains tax rate has actually brought in more revenue, he comes back by saying it’s not about money but fairness. Not about money? Why then have a budget? Call me simple minded, but aren’t federal taxes collected to cover the expenditures of Washington? What if I were to run a business and charge my customers according to their income, saying, “It’s not about money. It’s about fairness.”? And in the process of doing so, what if my revenue plummets because it was a fundamentally flawed business plan? I would be canned so fast it would make my head spin and I would be the laughingstock of the local business community. It’s an absurd idea! And yet Obama, who is an empty suit, can get away with it because “he cares.” Forget that his “caring” has no foundation in reason and impoverishes the nation. It has become very obvious that much of policy is no longer about what is best for the country. There can be no doubt that control is the objective, the facts be damned.
We live in an era of activism where pop culture props up those who yell for more “action” and “care” the most loudly, regardless of the efficacy of their ideas. In this environment, how do you stir up passion and emotion for smaller government and less action? It’s not easy. How do you stir it up for more government and more action? Easy. It’s much simpler to publicize growth and action than to market restraint and encourage responsibility. As in life, self-control and discipline over the long course is never sexy.
I do not like politics, but am interested by ideas. I don’t like all the schmoozing, networking, and whatever else goes on in Washington. That the political system is a necessary evil I understand. But what I desire from government is distinctly different from the trend we are currently experiencing. Almost every issue I can imagine supporting would try to lessen the power of government or repeal prior poor decisions. I am not an activist. I want to be left alone. I believe God will ask me to involve myself at some point, but the only reason I consider doing so is to protect us and help recover what others take away, not to actively pursue something new. How do you mobilize an army of people that would rather be uninvolved against activists who live for obtaining more power and being in the spotlight? Herein lies the conundrum for conservatism. On a personal level, if I am not an activist and have no desire to be a professional politician, how do I participate in something like this and still enjoy life? I don’t have an answer to this yet.
We face an opposition dedicated to and animated by finding new ways to grow government, spend more money, and take more control of our lives. There is no limit to the amount of enthusiasm they can create or power they wish to attain. Conversely, if the government were to do essentially nothing for the next year outside of approve what is already mandated for its operation, I would be ecstatic. When I think about my children’s future, I do not think, “I hope they have as much regulation and government intervention as possible.” But rather I wish them a future full of freedom and the opportunity to make something of themselves. When I hear speeches full of pessimism that try to stir up fear or envy and tell us how we need yet more government, they seem petty and childish, and cannot hold a candle to Ronald Reagan’s inauguration address where he speaks of government as the problem, not the solution. It’s sad to see modern figures espousing these ideals, like a Duncan Hunter or a Ron Paul, left in the political dust in favor of candidates concerned with popularity. But I believe at some point, and hopefully it won’t be too late, the millions of people waiting for someone to embrace the Constitution, limited government, capitalism, liberty, and everything that has made this country great, will have their say and cry out to be left alone.
