Lexington, KY - In a recent article by Dr. Dugi entitled “Defining Conservatism and Liberalism in 2012,” he attempted to define Conservatism in Part 1 of a two-part series.
He cites Romney as a fiscal conservative, Santorum a social conservative, Gingrich claiming to be both and Paul as fiscal conservative and social libertarian.
Dr. Dugi defines fiscal conservatives as wanting no taxes on the “haves,” the social conservatives being against abortion and gay marriage and libertarians wanting less government along the lines of classical liberalism (which, by the way, is the exact opposite of what we call liberalism today). He further states that basing individual freedom as promoting benefit to all is a false assumption because, I quote, “clearly pursuing one’s individual freedom can subvert promoting values beneficial to all (witness the economic problems of the late 2000s)”.
Another worrisome phrase in Dr. Dugi’s article, which is his major theme, is at the end of the article:
“And since the business of government is welfare, one always need ask: Whose?”
As a prelude to the basis of my beliefs, I don’t care for any of the Republican presidential candidates and haven’t been a fan of the Republican Party for several years. I may be registered Republican, but I am most definitely Conservative. It is virtually impossible to explain Conservatism in a single article, but here is the short version.
The basis for American society is built on two premises:
• All persons have the right to life, liberty and property granted to them by the Creator.
• “We The People” was written very large at the beginning of the Constitution for a reason.
For the first time in the history of the world, it was stated by a government that the power resides in the people, not the king, pharaoh or ruling class. The individual is affirmed in the founding documents as the single, most important building block of society.
The individual’s rights are to be protected by our government. One’s life. One’s liberty. One’s property.
The current income tax, real estate tax and personal property tax are confiscations of individual property without consent. These taxes are not voluntary and the intent of implementing them with the 16th Amendment in 1916 was to redistribute wealth and thereby allow the government to increase in size and scope. The initial “sales pitch” for the 16th Amendment was that it would only be a three-percent tax on the top one percent of income earners. Sound familiar?
Who is Dr. Dugi referring to when he says “the haves?”
Do the following experiment by asking everyone you know, “At what point is a person considered a “have?”
Some people will say $50,000 a year, some $100,000 a year, some $250,000. If we truly believe that each individual has a right to their own property, then by what right do we have to judge what anyone makes? If someone like Anthony Davis makes several million dollars next year, how does that affect me?
Dr. Dugi states that to pursue one’s individual freedom subverts promoting benefits to society. Maybe if you are a drug dealer or a thief, but I would argue that the exact opposite is true.
Did Steve Jobs invent, promote and market all the technology that Apple has given us because he wasn’t trying to create wealth for himself? What about Henry Ford? What about Bill Gates? What about Thomas Edison? What about all the business entrepreneurs in Kentucky? Of those of you that read this, do you operate your business to provide for you and your family or for taxes to support Frankfort and Washington?
In the “Wealth of Nations,” Adam Smith states his theory of the “invisible hand.” The invisible hand theory states that when individuals work for their own benefit then society as a whole benefits, as if being moved forward by an invisible hand. If an individual produces more than they consume and prudently invests the difference then that person will become wealthy. When more individuals do this than don’t, then the country will become wealthy. This is a long-standing economic fact, and the opposite is true as well.
When individuals don’t seek their own benefit and depend on others to provide for them, then society will move backwards, as if moved by an invisible hand. We are currently seeing this side of the theory as we digress into economic ruin based on debt and consumption instead of production and investment.
The problem of the late 2000s was the direct result of the government getting heavily involved in business and the economy in general. Any time the government gets involved in any segment of the economy, it will skew the free market system. Do not take my words as fact; investigate for yourself. Prior to Medicaid and Medicare, the cost of health care was on the same inflation rate as the Consumer Price Index. Shortly after their implementation, the cost of health care began its meteoric rise. Do you think that the implementation of the newest intrusion into the health care system won’t affect those costs more so?
The “business” of government is not welfare. The role of government is to defend the rights of individuals and the rule of law. Government’s goals are to grow larger and more powerful. The role of “We The People” is to limit the role, scope and power of government.
Trust the free market system. Trust the people of Kentucky. Trust yourself.