Compassionate Government
For those who don’t remember, early in the 2000 presidential campaign there was a divide in the Republican Party over the use of the term “compassionate conservative”. For many in the party, the need for the distinction was quite obvious. Conservatives were mean, unless they were the religious type, and then they were just extremists. Perhaps you’ve heard the following concept. “Regular” conservatives, it is said, wanted to teach the poor to fish, while liberals wanted to give the poor fish to eat. Conservative pointed out that at liberals were foolish, because they would need to keep feeding the poor everyday for the rest of their lives and their children and grandchildren as well. In essence, they would become permanent wards of the state and loyal voters fearful of losing their handouts. This was contrary to the American dream. What about hard work? Rugged individualism? Self reliance? To only feed a man a fish was to subjugate him to near slave status to the mercy of others. It robbed him of dignity and the ability to achieve his right to the pursuit of happiness. Liberalism, it was reasoned, was wholly un-American.
Liberals of course, scoffed at such a view. So, they argued, a man and his family must starve to death while taking fishing lessons from someone who takes the fish he catches and deducts the cost for the pole or nets and the training and then takes his profit off the top? This leaves the man with mere scraps with which to feed his family. The greedy fisherman CEO who owns the boat and hires the man lives fine and profits greatly while the man who is desperate and has no clout, must take what he gets. Is this the “brotherly love” that the city of Philadelphia in 1776 was known for? Is this the American way? Must a man live in poverty his whole life while making someone else wealthy off of his sweat? This seems to resemble slavery as well.
For the conservative in the Republican Party, this was a serious issue. These conservatives were conscious of the PR image that they were constantly fighting. Americans may as a whole be politically ignorant, but they recognize injustice and compassion when they see it. Neither solution of teaching or feeding were sufficient, but if only one was to be chosen, a man needs to eat first, if he is to work. Perhaps this will explain the liberal’s argument about free school breakfast and lunches in public schools. Enter the term “Compassionate Conservative”. Why not do both! Genius! If we allow welfare, but limit it’s duration and require the recipient to seek employment, it’s a win-win. A kinder and gentler America.
Other Republicans were aghast. Conservatism did not need a qualifier. How dare anyone suggest that there was a need for the adjective “compassionate”. It was self evident. The true definition of conservatism was dripping with compassion. To suggest the need for the adjective compassionate was to concede the point to liberals. This became a struggle over who could be more “compassionate”? Republicans would thus join the battle on the Liberal Democrats terms. A battle the conservatives were sure to lose.
The decision for the Republicans to appear compassionate began long before the 2000 election. George H.W. Bush, Ford and Nixon were moderates. Each caved many times to the pressure of public perception. The net result was the continual expansion of size and scope of the government. George W. Bush did not reverse this trend. Although his tax cuts and pro-life positions were surely conservative, the culmination of his presidency resulted in an increase in the growth of government. Individual trees were indeed conservative, but the forest as a whole was not.
The history of corruption, waste, patronage and bureaucratic stagnation in government is well known. In fact, it is far more shocking to discover the opposite when it occasionally occurs. Each and every wasteful program was masked behind a wall labeled “compassion”. It is the responsibility of each citizen to stay interested and informed. It is the responsibility of the free press to discover and proclaim its discoveries. The current “crisis” status of the economy at the state, national and global levels invites rapid and radical responses. Due diligence requires a restless mind and a watchful eye toward the continued expansion of government in the name of compassion. Liberty is never free.
Posts
