Conservative Compassion
By Vative C. Onser
I have become acquainted with several people in my life that were life-long Democrats. I have also seen these people modify their belief system, based on the unearthing of some basic truths. I believe I have a clear understanding of both the conservative and liberal agendas, although I would hardly profess to be an expert of any kind. I do my best to educate myself as I can.
I have been made aware that some people claim that Republicans "want to keep the money right where it is" and, to some degree I would agree, if we are both on the same page as to where exactly the money IS at. Additionally, I would like to introduce you to what I believe is a conservative angle on what is commonly called "the trickle down theory". I believe, as many seem to, that this theory is INDEED A SHAM… but it's not so much a tactic of the con side as it is of the lib side, and I'll tell you why. I'd also like to cover the question "where is the compassion on the conservative side?".
When I discuss politics, I occasionally point out the literal meaning of words, or at least people's typical free association with words, taken literally. You can't spell "conservative" without "conserve". Just a small point, but one worth making, considering the meanings associated with the word "liberal".
Typically, one would associate the words such as "ample" or better yet, "generous" with the word liberal, such as "apply liberally", or " dispense liberally". Webster’s New World Dictionary defines liberality as: “n., pl the quality or state of being liberal; specifically a) willingness to give or share freely; generosity b) absence of narrowness or prejudice in thinking; broadmindedness.”
I have always maintained that it is very easy to be generous with someone else's money, and I believe parallels can be drawn between the ways liberals believe they should spend "our money" and the literal use of the words "liberal" and "generous".
Conservatives ARE interested in keeping the money "right where it is" as, just as long as that is in the hands of the American people; working men and women who are also TAXPAYERS. The Grand Plan never included burdensome taxation to support the masses.
Socialism was not what the Crafters had in mind. Many of us cons believe they wanted to diagram a plan whereby the people utilized the principles of free enterprise to capitalize on whatever the markets (here and abroad) would support, clear enough revenue to provide for the defense of this new land, and pay forward the operating expenses of running the government body. (A relatively small governing body…)
***
As a United States citizen, the day you were born on American soil, you were endowed with certain rights, rights so basic and so precious, that writers of the U.S. Constitution gave God credit for providing them, yet placed responsibility on us, even as mere mortals, to protect and uphold these "self evident truths" to the best of our ability. All the humans of this earth, it is believed, should be FREE. That was not to say that the bare essentials of life were to be provided for free. I believe it was James Bradford who stated boldly: "Those who will not work, shall not eat". Not an altogether absurd premise, really… it has always been the law of nature, anyway. In the wild kingdom, the creatures that do not place a high priority on their freedom are doomed to be victims of capture or extinction. We are somewhat more sophisticated in that respect. As parents we protect and provide for the health and safety of our young, and as adults, we often provide some kind of benefits to our elderly as well. Typically, the elderly in our society have contributed to the health and wellness of our society, and having done so, are entitled to reap some of the benefits in their twilight years. It is expected of everyone to provide for his or her own retirement somehow, and given the enormous opportunities that abound in this land, it is plausible that most everyone with a moderate sense of discipline should be able to do this in the span of a lifetime.
How things have changed! Now we've got able-bodied men and women looking for handouts, and leftists demanding cradle-to-grave support for those having contributed little or nothing at all. The system was not designed to farm parasites. It was designed to be a stable society because everybody was motivated to do more, make more, have more, save more, and ultimately to share more, based on personal choice.
About the "trickle down theory": I have been a republican since the days of the Nixon/McGovern race. I don't think the present day Democrats are supporting JFK's platforms and beliefs in any way. He has been quoted as saying "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask instead, what can you do for your country?"
It has been my observation that the Democrats have used the term "trickle down" to erroneously describe Republican economics. The theory maintains that if you sprinkle enough money on the people at the top, eventually it will "trickle down" finding its way into the hands of John Q. Public; lastly and more specifically, the poor and challenged of this nation. In actuality, it doesn't really hold true in a system based on capitalism.
Now, we all know that politicians are driven to garner the lion's share of the votes; in so doing, many of them are simultaneously attempting to build up their image, while tearing down the competition's credibility – they've never really been the most honest people, as we know. –But! I would say that the Democrats have used deceit as a way of furthering their agenda in ways that Republicans tend to steer away from.
In a communist/socialist society, you have the few elite, governing the many. Basically, you have the haves and have-nots. How are the needs of the have-nots met? By rations handed down from the government, not as a gift, but as an entitlement. The vast majority of work is done by the people, and the governing board takes care of the overseeing of the commerce, and subsequent distribution of the surplus (if there is one). Now then, isn't all the money (i.e. wealth, manpower, energy, marketable commodities, etc.) being "sprinkled on top", while "trickling down" to the masses? Have you ever known a communist society to promote capitalism? Absolutely not. In the eyes of a communist/socialist regime, when you give people the freedom to do whatever they want, the control previously held over them goes away with it. Without that control there is absolute chaos. –That is, unless you have a body to govern (oversee, mind you, not dictate) their freedom. We have yet to see a communist society able to honestly compare to our system of a democratic society. Of all the "isms" communism, socialism, Stalinism, Marxism etc. none have been as effective as the "anti-ism" of a democracy. You can say "Well look at Red China, they are communist, and they're doing fine!" until you realize that the average annual income is less than a good night out on the town in the U.S.
They are an oppressed nation with little to show for their efforts, being born poor, working hard for a lifetime, and then dying poor.
That is not what conservatives want for America.
As for Republicans not introducing or backing any legislation to help low-income groups afford to develop and hone the necessary skills to compete in today's environment, I'm not sure that I agree with all of that, although I'm sure it may appear that way, and if you have been a liberal democrat for a lifetime, I'm sure that's all you've heard from the folks along your party line.
America was never intended to be a land of entitlements. It was a hypothesis dreamed up by some very astute businessmen, landowners and countrymen. Yes, some of them owned slaves. That has little or no bearing on the design of the plan at all.
All through the civilization of mankind, empires were built on the backs of slave labor, sometimes through war campaigns and capture, sometimes through purchase; nonetheless, it had been a reality for millennia, and sometime in the mid to late 1800's a new consciousness developed, and eventually the black slaves (in America) were liberated. After being bred for simple work, although they now had more freedom of choice, they were not going to become educated enough to compete with even a common Caucasian without some serious and deliberate effort to overcome what they had been bred for: simple labor.
Fast-forward through several decades and recall the progress (slow, yes… but progress just the same. *It's amazing how education contributes to the acceleration of progress…) of black people coming into their own, working for pay, owning land, and becoming part of the fabric of America. Enter the Southern Democrat. In an effort to gain voting populace (if you understand the structure, you will see how they laid out the voting procedures based on land area and census figures that were required by law) they started offering material entitlements (typical campaign promises… most of which, I'm sure were minimized after being elected) to blacks that were eligible to vote, and a vote for so-and-so was viewed by many blacks as a vote for upward mobility insurance for the future of black Americans.
In reality, it had a crippling effect, because, as I stated before, it reeks of socialism/communism. It was twisted to become a way of keeping the blacks downtrodden and voting, and still hoping for change.
But the change was going to be slow in coming, because true liberation would take away from the Democratic Party's voter base. Once a poor black (or white, or yellow, or brown, or red…) person finds out that a capitalist society provides all that is needed to get ahead with little or no government assistance, what would they need the so-called "caretakers" for? I believe this is how the Democrats triangulated toward the path of liberalism (subsequently socialism, and eventually, communism). Offering benefits from the government coffers just to maintain the voter base, and then as the base grew broader, there were more to provide for, so up went the taxes to cover the spiraling cost of keeping the party alive, and so on, and so on.
Fast-forward again, to present day:
The liberal left is always pushing for tax increases to cover all the votes they are buying. Remember, high taxes were not part of the original plan. Defending the country and paying forward the cost of running a small government, THAT was the plan. Now look at how the spending is out of control, taxes are ridiculous, (just look at California –famous for being one of the most prosperous regions in the world, now it's on the verge of economic disaster) unions have a grip on huge pockets of employment opportunity, the low-income groups still aren't advancing as expediently as they otherwise could have…
Why? Well, how is all this money being spent? Liberals will tie up millions of dollars in courts trying to remove the word God from the books, fighting for abortion rights, gay rights, animal rights, plant rights, illegal immigrant rights, etc. Once all of these new "rights" are established, some branch of the "New and Improved Big Government" will likely be called upon to subsidize them; in addition, liberals are trying to make the government pay for things we can afford, and should be paying for on our own. If a special interest group wants to save the spotted owl, instead of turning to Big Government for funding, they should be turning to the private sector, rolling up their sleeves and getting to work. Look at how money is being poured into public education with less than satisfactory results. Again, look at how many public school teachers and professors vote to the left. Why? Unions.
A lot of union employees typically vote Democrat because they will be offered tangible benefits for their voting block.
Like what?
Legislation.
Things like higher pay, more vacation time, and job security with little or no accountability. Not much of a return on our investment there. In spite of all the money spent, our children still fall seriously behind in the grand scheme of things, academically speaking. Most countries mandate a minimum of 2 languages minimum, and our children struggle with learning to read and write a native tongue. It doesn't sound pretty, and I'm sure I'll make a lot of enemies, but it is the saddest of truths that nobody likes to hear about.
Where is the compassion in conservative philosophy?
I believe it is interwoven throughout every fiber of the cloth we are cut from. We typically vote pro life, spend tax money in a way that stimulates the economy (literally), provides for our national defense so our loved ones can be as safe as humanly possible, whether civilian or military. Conservatives understand that if you cut the parasitic drains from the coffers, those funds can be redirected towards more meaningful, positive changes.
Compassion is not a synonym for Government Handouts, Welfare, Socialized Health Care, Social Security, or Affirmative Action. Being compassionate is to know the difference between a handout and a hand up. Compassion is offering support for the loved ones that have to rebuild their lives after 9-11, or Hurricane Katrina (which was, by the way, George W. Bush’s fault…). Compassion is teaching a child how to read, not for the prevailing union wage, but because you are passionate about the future of our children and our country. One cannot choose the household to which one is born. However, anyone, from any walk of life can be successful on his or her own , if they have the ambition and dedication. If you want education, you will have to work for it. If you want success, you will have to work even harder for it.
There may be sacrifices, but you won't go hungry in this country unless you choose to. You won't die in the middle of a busy street for lack of services or money.
"If you give a man a fish, he'll not but be hungry for a day. If you teach a man to fish, he'll not be hungry for a lifetime".
Liberals have a tendency to handout "a fish" in hopes of maintaining a powerful base, whereas true conservatives endeavor to take the time and use our resources to "teach a man to fish". It takes longer on the outset, but the rewards are infinitely better, last longer, and can be passed down. A fish cannot be passed on. Education certainly can be passed on, and has been since the beginning of civilization.
It is my fervent belief that a conservative republican, if he's true to his class, will do more to further the advancement of our society as a whole, than the liberals selling out every principle they can wrench free from the structure. There are times when it is better to slap a hand than hold it, and some times it takes tough love to help someone achieve his or her goals, or save them from their mistakes. Being soft-hearted sometimes causes more harm than good. Conservatives take care of their own more effectively than liberals because their commitment and intentions are vastly different. The popularity contest has to end sometime, and when it does, the results will be glaringly obvious.
If you are Hispanic, the liberals are catering to your racial class right now, and the biggest reason is to attempt to gain back the power that they have lost. I have absolutely no intentions of offending anyone, (except perhaps a cadre of liberal supporters, to which I say, "save your ink, save your time, and save your breath”. I'm pure Teflon when it comes to the ineffective counter points and B.S. that are frequently lobbed at me...) however, I am concerned about democrats promising illegal aliens material benefits in exchange for votes. Hispanics are quickly becoming "The New Blacks" for the liberal left.
Remember how it turned out for the blacks in the beginning? Black conservatives will tell you what a mistake it was to be "put on the payroll" of the Democratic Party, and what long lasting, negative repercussions it had.
You simply can't get ahead on a government check. You can get by (maybe), but not ahead. It would be realistic to say that the government handouts to which I’m referring are very likely the most frequently and easily abused ongoing programs ever implemented.
Remember this: IT IS NOT THE GOVERNMENT'S MONEY! It is ours, and we deserve to hold on to as much of it as we can. I'm perfectly comfortable with paying my fair share, as long as it goes to promote the health and wellness of this country, which I love so very dearly.
Please believe me when I say that I am perfectly willing to go to war fighting and prepared to die to uphold the rights of you and every other legitimate American citizen, to pursue a life of happiness and growth. However, my spirit becomes heavily laden with sorrow when I think of how this great land is being raped by people who, quite frankly, have an agenda, one which I can only describe as evil.
To quote Darryl Worley:
What about our freedom,
And this piece of ground,
We didn't get to keep 'em
By backin' down
I've been writing this for quite some time now, so I'm going to have to go. If I could leave the reader with one timeless piece of wisdom regarding all people, be they professionals, friends and especially politicians, I suppose it would be this:
"I will listen what you say, but I'm going to base my decisions on what you actually do…"
*I CHOOSE LOGIC OVER EMOTION*
