Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: uncommonsense; firebrand
I don't believe that libertarianism and conservative personal values are mutually incompatible as firebrand would suggest (though, again, state enforcement of personal morality does run counter to libertarianism).

That being said, the alliance between fiscal libertarians and social conservatives is not one of logical necessity. The most obvious counterexample is someone like William Jennings Bryan, who on theological and social questions was a "conservative" by today's standards while being economically to the Left of Obama.

In other words, there's no necessary connection between what we call social and economic conservatism, it's just the coalition of convenience that we have today. Similarly, there's no logical connection between economic socialism and immorality, although as I said in another post, it is much easier to live a dissipated and immoral life with a nanny state propping you up.

114 posted on 04/11/2013 3:01:36 PM PDT by ek_hornbeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies ]


To: ek_hornbeck
"In other words, there's no necessary connection between what we call social and economic conservatism, it's just the coalition of convenience that we have today."

I agree. One nuance - I believe economic conservatism (survival, production, and abundance) drives broad-based social morality better than statist imposition of rules against immorality.

Rules against immorality seeks to minimize the worst of behavior from a minority of actors. Broad rules that entangles all.

Economic conservatism seeks to maximize opportunity for the best of behavior from a majority of actors. Broad principles that uplifts all.

When there's a clear connection between cause and effect from a Natural Law perspective, the social system works best. When it's distorted by man's impositions on actions according to the definition of the majority, the results are chaotic. It also creates an ever growing police force who are no longer producers, dedicated to identifying and regulating behaviors, having become powerful masters over both producers and takers.

The Pilgrims starved when they first came to America because they instituted a collective property economic model. High producers became resentful of low producers who received a disproportionate share of the output. High producers reduced their output and this caused a community crisis until the collectivist rules were rescinded.

I believe economic conservatives are more in tune with this aspect of society. "If a man will not work - then let him not eat". Work fulfills the sustenance needs and keeps everyone too busy for anything but occasional mischief.

"Similarly, there's no logical connection between economic socialism and immorality, although as I said in another post, it is much easier to live a dissipated and immoral life with a nanny state propping you up."

Agree. But based on the afore mentioned reasons, I believe true liberty provides a platform for greater good than manufactured morality (economic socialism).

Free people are more committed, therefore energetic, therefore prosperous, out of the abundance more generous, and therefore virtuous to others less fortunate.

America has been the standard for over a century. I don't see this continuing because we've adopted the statist / collectivist model of society.

117 posted on 04/12/2013 12:21:04 PM PDT by uncommonsense (more laws = more government = more coercive power = more crimes of consequence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson