Its a matter of life or death (Vanity)

Recently I engaged a young college student in a conversation about the basic differences between conservativism and liberalism. I thought I did a pretty good job espousing the virtues of conservatism, but I remember wishing at the time that I had an argument with more punch...something more fundamental. After some pondering, I hit upon a simple, but stark comparison:

Conservatism is the philosophy of Life and Liberty. Liberalism is the philosophy of Death and Slavery. It is as simple as that. I may not be the first person to think of this, since it seems so obvious, but regardless, here is how I break it down:

Liberal policy favors:

1. Unfettered publicly funded abortion at all stages of pregnancy. (Death)
2. Legal euthanasia for old people or terminally ill patients. (Death)
3. Funding abortions and birth control in third world countries. (Death and Eugenics)
4. Withholding health care from elderly patients in favor of the young and healthy. (Death)
5. Government funding and control of formerly private institutions such as banks. (Slavery)
6. Increased taxes to pay for bigger government to wield more control over private institutions. (Slavery)
7. Increased government regulation in the private sector such as mandates for handicapped access, minimum wage, hiring and firing practices etc... (Slavery)
8. De-funding national defense and removing guns from private citizens. (Slavery)

Conservative policy favors:

1. Criminalizing abortion. (Life)
2. Health care choices should not be made based on one's perceived usefulness to society. (Life)
3. Unfettered capitalism promoting competition, entrepreneurship and production. (Liberty)
4. Lower taxes promoting opportunities and new business. (Liberty)
5. A strong defense to preserve our liberty. (Liberty)
6. The right of the individual to own and use guns. (Liberty)

I normally debate it from this perspective:

Conservatives believe in themselves and the useful ambitious talents of their fellow citizens. They expect to be rewarded for the skills and efforts and are thus encouraged to produce.

Liberals believe in fairness and equality. While it sounds Noble, they expect that fairness and equality to be regulated and enforced at the hand of an authority. Their flaw is the Utopian belief that fair and equal will somehow bring the living standards of the majority up and only impact a few less deserving rich folks. When in fact the only way to legislate fairness and equality is to bring all to the lowest acceptable standard.

Humans are motivated by the prospect of reward. Unlike animals, we change our behavior (both good and bad) based on the expected return on behavior.

I like it alot. I think you have boiled it down to a very succinct, easy-to-understand pair of extreme concepts.

(Extreme, in this case, is a good thing — the concepts are polar opposites)

As another poster has commented, there are many whose beliefs would put them into the grey areas: that’s just fine, but let’s recognize that as the fuzzy thinking that it actually is.

In reality, there is no such thing as grey areas: just fuzzy thinking.

Kind of drawing on Tenacious 1's comments-

Conservatism favors equal opportunity and promotes greatness- you are free to achieve whatever your talents, abilities, and effort allow you to. Each person has freedom and power over their own future. Accordingly, no person should be given an explicit advantage because of gender or skin color- nor should they be punished for it. The resulting fruits of labor are the individual's reward. It is best left to the individual to determine how they are to be used just as the individual determines their production and greatness. It rewards success.

Liberalism favors equality of outcome and fosters (at best) mediocrity- regardless of your talents, abilities, or effort. Through the confiscation of the productive person's labor, an effort is made to bring the "big guy" down to a level that the "little guy" can be artificially raised to. However, the individual has no freedom- it lies with the government- and fosters dependence while promoting descrimination. So, according to liberalism, it is perfectly acceptable to reward or punish individuals based on their skin color, gender, etc. "Affirmative Action" programs sound much more appealing than "Negative Reaction" programs. Similarly, "assistance" programs are at the "expense" of others.

Tax something, you get less of it. Incent something, you get more of it. So, the successful produce less and the numbers of the unproductive grow to receive their "share" of wealth. It promotes mediocrity in outcome.

However, "outcome" is not static until death. Until death, liberalism promotes the unequal treatment of individuals. If the government gave everyone $1000 today, next year some would have $0 and others would have multiples of that $1000 due to differences in abilities, values and effort. So, the process starts again- say around April 15th- and continues to promote a temporary outcome while removing freedom and power from all.

I forgot something.

Liberals have blinders on that suggests all social and economic action and endeavors are are a ZERO sum outcome. They believe that there is a limit to wealth, prosperity, etc. They then believe that if the high life, wealth, extravagance is horded by a few, then it must be at the expense of the many. They have already bought into what they hope for. It simply is not true. Freedom of everything is dynamic in its grandeur.

That said, in socialism/communism it is a zero sum. There is only so much to go around.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.