 |
|
The Bottom-line Fiscal Conservatism Isn't Conservative
Friday, May 11, 2007
It's time to dispense with the notion that "fiscal" conservatism is conservative.
I know we are used to this kind of distinction - there are "social" conservatives and then there are "fiscal" conservatives - but philosophically this distinction doesn't hold water.
Genuine conservatism, to start with, does not create false distinctions between the economy and society. Conservatism includes a belief in tax cuts and spending limits for civil government, but the conservative vision is far bigger than that. Genuine conservatism is a worldview - it is a philosophy about life and society - so it is a much broader philosophy than the "Fiscals" make it out to be.
|
|
|
Strategically it may be good political tact to concentrate on economic policy during an election, but one should never confuse strategy with the totality of a philosophy.
Don't get me wrong. I'm certainly happy that "Fiscals" believe in cutting government taxes and limiting federal spending, but really, believing in tax cuts is a no-brainer; even a Rock Star like Mick Jager understands that much.
As I said, Conservatism is a philosophy about life, and culture, and the very important balance of power between social institutions like the family, the church and the state. And that is where tax cuts and spending limits come in; you see tax cuts are the very important procedural constraint we place on civil government to ensure it does not become a pariah that ends up devouring the family and the church and other integral social institutions.
Government is far too powerful as a social institution and that is why it needs to be held in check. When it ventures beyond its legitimate role in society - to establish and enforce civil justice (as opposed to social justice) - it in fact becomes a social pariah, a monster. And that's where tax cuts and spending limits come in; they are the best way to starve the beast.
And that's why I want to clear the air: because when "Fiscals" deride Socons - conservatives - with the false accusation that we're simply imposing morality on others and we want to use the government to do the imposing, they've got it all wrong.
Conservatives are simply saying "civil government simply has no jurisdiction", it has no right, either to change the nature of marriage, or to fund abortions, or to create "universal day-care". It simply has no business and that's why tax cuts and spending limits are fundamental to conservatism. Because when you cut off the civil government's food supply - tax dollars - it simply has less money to get involved in social projects it simply has no business being in.
When people say to me, "Times are changing, Tristan. People no longer hold to 'traditional values'," I say, "That may be the case, but the agent to bring about these so-called changes should not be the civil government."
If the culture is going to change it should happen naturally, and from the bottom up, through the free market, the family and other social institutions. And not by government manipulation or the social engineering that is happening because public money is given to particular special interest groups; that is a monstrous distortion of civil government's power and purpose.
That's why "Fiscals" are the biggest political irony around. For, while they criticize "social" conservatives for being "single-issue" driven - focusing too much on family values - it is the "Fiscal" conservatives who in fact have whittled conservatism down to a basic procedural policy while forgetting the reason for it.
You simply cannot defensibly argue for tax cuts and spending limits and then approve of social programs all in the name of being "socially liberal" or "progressive" or even "compassionate" (which is such a misnomer anyway - but that's for another column).
Social programs cost tax payers; lots and lots of their money. Take one simple example: Considering the well-documented evidence of the chronic, and expensive health problems related to sexual behaviour, including the recent reports about rising rates of diseases like syphilis among homosexuals, you can be sure that the motive of self-interest that "Fiscals" talk so much about would probably cut the number of practicing homosexuals or those engaged in heterosexual sex outside of marriage by 50-80% if Canadians had to pay for their own health care. But try selling free market health care to so-called Fiscals!
That's why I maintain that "fiscal" conservatism isn't conservative. It is a confused coalescing of mutually exclusive ideas. You simply cannot mix conservative economic policy - tax cuts and spending limits - with leftwing sympathies for social programs that cost lots of money and radically undermine the balance of power. It's like trying to mix water and oil. It just can't happen.
| Yours for our culture, |
Tristan Emmanuel |
| ECP Centre President |
Hardcover
$39.95 cdn, $28.95 us
 |
|
Softcover
$23.95 cdn, $18.95 us
|
|
WARNED
Canada's Revolution Against Faith, Family and Freedom Threatens America by Tristan Emmanuel
This book is essential reading for both Americans and Canadians even though it is more particularly directed to our American friends. Both countries face a serious challenge to their cultures. This book exposes the radical exploitation of Canada at the hands of extremist activists, leftwing politicians and a plethora of crusading activist judges, who are using their status in Canada to get at America. Their aim is marriage. But the prize is America. They want to use marriage as a weapon to systematically destroy the Judeo-Christian civilization of North America, but to do that they need America to "go gay". Gay "marriage" will open up America to the rest of the demands of the homosexual political movement. Everything from school curriculum to parental rights, adoption, the age of consent and religious freedoms will be up for grabs once gay "marriage" is made legal in America. Unless socons in both countries unite and work to resist these political opponents, we can kiss our continent good-bye.
|
|
|
|
|