Posted by
JDComments on Friday, October 13, 2006 4:14:11 PM
With the political debate becoming evermore hysterical and accusatory, and so many complex issues ranging from America’s fuel strategy going forward to the War on Terror serving as focal points for debate and recriminations, the meaning of Conservatism has become lost to great degree as the name itself as become affixed to one side of the national debate. As people take sides, Liberal and Conservative have become the teams, but at the expense of clarity and understanding. What indeed is Conservatism?
This question would probably be answered in different ways by different branches of the movement itself, and yet there is a fundamental bedrock tenet which underlies it even if many don’t realize that. Simply, it is an acknowledgment of the fallibility of men, and the futility of trying to “perfect” them through governmental institutions. All else, as the Biblical phrase so aptly puts it, is commentary.
But what does this mean in terms of the practical applications of Conservatism as a political philosophy? First and foremost, that history counts, and that the processes and institutions that Men have devised, and which control his imperfection while allowing his progress, should never be discarded unless careful thought and extreme prudence are used beforehand in weighing the pros and cons of the argument for change. The collective wisdom of Mankind, as expressed in these existing creations, including Family, Church and Neighborhoods, should be given great respect, and conserved as much as possible. That which is time tested should take precedence over the new and novel.
Secondly, because men are imperfect, giving any man or group of men more power by increasing government regardless of the goal envisioned is always considered dangerous, and rightfully so. The model of Liberal Revolution is the French Revolution, which , in one fell swoop, eliminated the Church, Monarchy, Aristocracy , even the calendar and units of measurement, in the name of rationality and progress, and it went from the crowd governing to the Directorate to the three Consuls to Napoleonic, and absolute, authoritarian rule. This is what the other governments in Europe feared and ultimately waged war against, and what Conservatives since then have continued to fear; in the name of Progress and the People, the imposition of stronger and bigger government which , in the hands of imperfect men, become tyranny.
The Founders of the US understood this, and that is why they incorporated checks and balances and the Bill of Rights and all the other restrictions on governmental power that we have. However, as Jefferson said, the price of liberty is constant vigilance, and so we must constantly be on the lookout for those who, in the name of progress and equality, would weaken or destroy the institutions which support and protect us, whether the cause is gay marriage or separation of church and state, and would increase the power of government . The law of unintended consequences and man’s nature insures that the end result of these kind of changes would be very different then anticipated or planned, and probably very harmful to the fabric of our society and survival of our nation.
Liberals believe they can make things perfect through their reason if only they can be given the power to do so. No problem is too big, no obstacle too difficult to succumb to governmental power. Conservatives know that man is ruled by passions, instincts and desires which will never allow for a perfect society, and the bigger the government, the greater the chance for abuse and tyranny, but we can have a world where everyone can have the chance to be happy, or as it says in the Declaration of Independence, the right to pursue Happiness, with no guarantee of success, because there are no guarantees in life. This hope of happiness through limited government and maintenance of the institutions and processes which have been time tested is something worth conserving.