What is a political “conservative”? Are Bush Republicans conservatives?
The American public uses the terms “liberal” and “conservative” as synonymous with a set of values. But the current definition of “conservative” that politicians use may be misleading to some voters. Two papers have recently addressed aspects of the problem of definition. Ethan Fishman wrote “Not Compassionate, Not Conservative” in the Winter 2007 issue of The American Scholar. Everyone concerned with what the candidates for public office really mean when they describe themselves as “conservative” should read that paper. Another article on this subject was Sylvia Tucker’s column on July 5 in The Daily Advance: “Patriots criticize what they love.”
Our history of Western thought identifies “conservative” as representing moderation, practicality, prudence, and cautious consideration of action based on known facts. Our Western conservative tradition built on the works of Aristotle and Edmund Burke who believed in “natural law,” the set of universal moral concepts which give order to our individual and governmental decisions. “Natural law” guides us to honor, integrity, justice and courage. But both writers recognized human inadequacies and did not believe that, given total freedom, humankind would rise to the ideals of natural law. Rather people require direction by the values of natural law. For example, natural law requires owners to treat workers honorably and to provide a product at a fair price. But unbridled market forces will create selfishness in people and companies. Thus, the true conservative is careful, recognizes both natural law and human frailties, and acts on prudent reason.
Current day politicians who call themselves “conservative” typically act based on immediate feelings rather than temperance and reasoning from good evidence to action. Fishman points out that the Bush administration, self-labeled as conservative, allows the market to run free yet undermines freedom of privacy, religion, speech and the press. The present “conservative” government has restricted the 4th Amendment right against warrantless searches, opened medical records, fostered the subsidy of religions for which the taxpayer may not subscribe in the name of “faith based initiatives,” ordered librarians to open information on library patrons, and tried to influence public radio and TV. Opposition to abortion while preventing access to birth control has been vindictive and arrogant.
The foreign policy of the “conservative” Bush administration has been particularly off base. The invasion of Iraq, and the failure to justify its claim that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and was partners with al-Qaida when those arguments were discredited through bipartisan congressional committees are inconsistent with the conservative philosophy. The present administration’s ideas about the environment and the national debt, all causing grave harm to our children for generations to come, is particularly at variance with conservatism. Quite imprudently our government has severely damaged our environment by rejecting the international Kyoto Protocol. It’s also given us a national debt of many trillions of dollars.
Other inconsistencies with conservatism abound. The Bush administration has a clear hostility to the United Nations, an interest in easily changing our Constitution, and an anti-intellectualistic failure to understand the cultural differences of other countries.
Finally, Tucker’s column applies to the current situation. I love America and see the present day Republican Party ripping it apart under the false name of conservatism. I will speak up and object to this. Republicans should not be allowed to whip citizens into anger over distortions while they are themselves guilty of severe violations. The true conservative Republicans, none of which appear to be running for office, will reject the Bush administration’s rape of our Constitution, our land and our future.
Reed Adams is a sociologist and criminologist living in Elizabeth City
Your comments
Its Cynthia Tucker
12/15/2008 12:06:27 AM
Its Cynthia Tucker of the Atlanta Constitution whose column appeared in the Advance and is referenced above by Mr. Reed as Sylvia Tucker. She is a left leaning flame thrower who has never said anything positive about a Republican that i can ever remember. Quoting her to build your case never got me past the paragraph.
Suggest removalDumb
10/25/2008 11:55:23 AM
Cynthia Tucker is a dumb -other#$%&*@.
Suggest removalButch
10/24/2008 03:14:17 PM
Ya,Ya, Just please someone Please tell me where the money is coming from. I have not given any money to the voteing machines, but the O's e-mail funding keeps spitting out millions of dollars, where is it coming from, I don't believe it is all the citizens of the "Good Ole USA"
Suggest removalGod Bless America & Our Troops
To every journalist
10/23/2008 09:14:16 PM
If you at our local daily newspaper continue to let Americans believe â and vote as if â President Bush and the Republicans caused the crisis, then you are joining in that lie.
Suggest removalIf you do not tell the truth about the Democrats â including Barack Obama â and do so with the same energy you would use if the miscreants were Republicans â then you are not journalists by any standard.
Post a Comment
Comments that include profanity, personal attacks or any other inappropriate material are prohibited. By using our site you agree to our ground rules and our terms of use. There could be a delay of up to 5 minutes before your comment appears.