The Corner

Re: Is Conservatism Good For Everybody?

A couple emails:

Jonah,Your thinking out loud was spot-on. Particularly this bit: But I think the argumentation of conservatism might be enhanced if we

got a little better at defending capitalism on the grounds that it is

moral and just and not merely more productive.

I’ve been arguing with my leftist friends, for years, trying to persuade

them that their preferences (Marxist, in the end) are ridiculous. It

wasn’t until I started articulating my defense of conservatism in the terms

you’ve described that they started acknowledging that supply-side policies

aren’t inherently evil. I could be wrong, but my hunch is that most

Americans already feel a good deal of sympathy toward the “liberty” side of

this argument – though, they probably wouldn’t go too far – and once

conservatism is articulated in terms of morality and justice, then I think

it takes little time to appeal to their egalitarian tendencies as well.

Once that’s done, then the left’s ability to claim dominion over any issue

on the “kitchen table” is severely minimized. At least that’s been my

experience.

I think conservatives could take notes from some of the neoconservatives in

this regard. Some of the folks you’d find in the neoncon reader, for

instance, have done a pretty good job at articulating their defense of the

free market in these terms. Though, their likelihood of ignoring

libertarian arguments should serve as an asterisk on this point.

Keep up the good work.

And:

Mr. Goldberg,

Excellent subject, and one that I have given some thought to.

The problem I have with liberals stating that they only want “what is good for most people”, is that it is almost always based on what they think people ought to want, or how they think people ought to behave. My guess is that if I am driving a gas-guzzling behemoth, they would by definition define that as “not good for me”. A real tension arises through this assumption that they know what is good for others, and the coercion required to make the vision happen.

A major strain of conservatism, on the other hand, couldn’t care less on the face of things what is “good for people”. That’s not our job to determine for other people what is good for them, is it? Our job is to support and maintain institutions and processes that are in synch with basic human nature and allow people to pursue happiness in their own way without undue interference. In the long run this will result in a world that is “good for almost everyone” (exceptions being crooks and socialists) because we all get to define what is good for us as individuals.

The key is the liberal arrogance of knowing what is good for people. Most conservatism is rather humble in this regard. I do not presume to lecture Matt Yglesias on what is good for him. Admittedly , their is a moralist strain of conservatism which does. But even these folks are generally assuaged by the conservative respect for tradition and traditional institutions.

Most Popular

A Few Cracks in the Progressive Wall

The contemporary progressive agenda — of, say, an Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, or Elizabeth Warren — has rarely appealed to 51 percent of the American electorate. Most polls show opposition to Court packing and the abolition of the Electoral College. Voters don’t seem to like ... Read More

A Few Cracks in the Progressive Wall

The contemporary progressive agenda — of, say, an Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, or Elizabeth Warren — has rarely appealed to 51 percent of the American electorate. Most polls show opposition to Court packing and the abolition of the Electoral College. Voters don’t seem to like ... Read More

Trump: No

Editor’s Note: The following is one of three essays, each from a different perspective, in the latest edition of National Review on the question of whether to vote for President Trump. The views below reflect those of the individual author, not of the NR editorial board as a whole. The other two essays can be ... Read More

Trump: No

Editor’s Note: The following is one of three essays, each from a different perspective, in the latest edition of National Review on the question of whether to vote for President Trump. The views below reflect those of the individual author, not of the NR editorial board as a whole. The other two essays can be ... Read More
Elections

Why Hunter?

Hunter Biden, Joe’s younger son, has become a fixture of the 2020 race. Since August 27, 2019, Donald Trump has tweeted about Hunter 59 separate times, making his colorful past one of the Trump campaign’s most important attacks on his rival. For many years, Hunter struggled with serious drug and alcohol ... Read More
Elections

Why Hunter?

Hunter Biden, Joe’s younger son, has become a fixture of the 2020 race. Since August 27, 2019, Donald Trump has tweeted about Hunter 59 separate times, making his colorful past one of the Trump campaign’s most important attacks on his rival. For many years, Hunter struggled with serious drug and alcohol ... Read More

Trump: Yes

Editor’s Note: The following is one of three essays, each from a different perspective, in the latest edition of National Review on the question of whether to vote for President Trump. The views below reflect those of the individual author, not of the NR editorial board as a whole. The other two essays can be ... Read More

Trump: Yes

Editor’s Note: The following is one of three essays, each from a different perspective, in the latest edition of National Review on the question of whether to vote for President Trump. The views below reflect those of the individual author, not of the NR editorial board as a whole. The other two essays can be ... Read More