Saturday, August 29, 2009

Can Conservatives and Libertarians Form a Coalition to Save the Constitution?

Before I launch into any discussion of practical ideas about this topic let’s discuss what conservatives and libertarians are in contemporary America.

If you peruse Wikipedia or other sites devoted to political philosophy you will find conservatism and libertarianism often defined in terms of left and right politics. Conservatism is often described as being right-wing politically and as supporting tradition and the status quo. Libertarianism is often described as on the right politically with regard to economic and government fiscal issues but on the left on social issues. You’ll even find such terms as libertarian socialism which I think was coined by Noam Chomsky. I consider this an oxymoron. Noam Chomsky like Obama is a Marxist as far as I am concerned. They employ other confusing terms to describe themselves to hide that fact. There is a trail of too many mass graves attributable to Marxism.

If you need a short definition, then the best way to think about libertarianism is as a natural or God given rights doctrine. Libertarians in the U. S. are classical liberals in the tradition of philosophers like Adam Smith, John Locke, et al and of the Founders of this country. They are focused on individual liberty. American conservatives on the other hand do value the tradition of individual liberty and the philosophy of the Founders but are focused on traditional moral values in a broader sense. However they aren’t wedded to the status quo to the detriment of material progress as is often implied by leftists who I will henceforth refer to as socialists or collectivists. As far as left and right are concerned those terms are misleading at best when applied to libertarians and conservatives. It’s best to think in terms of those who favor socioeconomic systems that rely on state control and collectivist approaches as opposed to those who favor decentralized socioeconomic systems that rely on individual liberty when determining the differences in political philosophies in the United States.

In this country libertarians and conservatives have a lot in common but also some important differences. Since libertarians generally place maximum importance on individual liberty they will often be against criminalizing harmful behavior which does not directly violate the rights of another person. In simple terms people have a right to harm themselves by stupid behavior. Conservatives will tend to favor control of certain behaviors because there is indirect harm to others. That’s a tradeoff that libertarians are less likely to favor.

I think the most central commonality in these two political groups is the belief in individual liberty and market capitalism which are decentralized socioeconomic approaches. The folks we refer to as leftists, progressives, or liberals, i.e. the collectivists place very little value on decentralized socioeconomic approaches. Although they will vociferously deny it collectivists tend to be authoritarian. They believe most of us need to be guided through life by the rulers of the state and their bureaucratic agents. They use to call themselves liberals but they really aren’t liberal at all.

So let’s recap by providing definitions. These are my definitions so you may disagree. In fact when it comes to defining American conservatism and libertarianism you will likely find no two conservatives and no two libertarians in the U. S. who define themselves completely the same way. In the end political and socioeconomic beliefs vary quite a bit by individual.

Conservative – one who holds traditional socioeconomic and moral values in the highest regard and believes that adhering to these values will best promote material progress and the general welfare.

Libertarian – one who holds individual liberty based on natural or God given rights in the highest regard and believes that adhering to individual liberty will best promote material progress and the general welfare.

Things like the philosophy of the Founders, the U. S. Constitution, market capitalism, and the concept of God given or natural rights are all part of American traditional values. Because these things are also important to individual liberty conservatives and libertarians have a lot in common. They often get to the same page but by slightly different reasoning.

As a practical matter the main differences between libertarians and conservatives are in the areas of foreign policy, immigration, and drug laws. Note I have used lower case c and l for conservatives and libertarians. We are talking about two groups of people not any political party. There are conservatives like Newt Gingrich and libertarians like Ron Paul in the Republican Party for example. Bob Barr was a Republican but is now a member of the Libertarian Party. In subsequent posts I’ll describe the aforementioned main differences in more detail and posit reasons why conservatives and libertarians should hold these differences in abeyance in order to save our constitutional republic.

G.M.

2 comments:

watchbird1 said...

I understand the concept of conservatives and libertarians potentially forming a coalition. And I can understand doing that for the purpose of garnering votes and winning an election.

But where does "save the Constitution" come in?

gxm said...

I’ll be writing a series of posts on this subject and will cover this in detail. Suffice it to say that there has been a decades long undermining of the U.S. Constitution as a written contract that supports our republican form of government. This undermining process goes back to the progressive movement of the late 19th century. Now we have folks undermining it on steroids. George Soros who is a big financial backer of Democratic candidates has said he would like to see the U. S. Constitution rewritten along the lines of the one for the European Union. That constitution is an abomination. Obama has said the U. S. Constitution only contains guarantees on “negative” rights. The socialist elements of this country only see the Constitution as an impediment to their “progressive” ideas.

G.M.