There are many dogmas that weave the tapestry of the American political landscape. In the years I have spent studying politics I have realized that most citizens are centrist even when they adamantly state support for a specific camp. Many people want the same things such as security, liberty, justice, and economic opportunities. The options for achieving said goals and the role that government plays in those methods is where the political factions differ or agree. One may ask where conservatism and liberalism stand on these simplified issues. The elements that define these philosophies will immediately answer that question.
Liberalism can be generalized as an ideology that “considers individuals the seat of moral value and each individual as of equal worth. Hence, the individual should be free to choose his or her own ends in life. Liberalism may be morally neutral in regard to the ends people choose for themselves, but it is not morally neutral in its view that such individual choice is desirable and must be safeguarded from unwarranted interference from the state.” (Hall). However, American liberalism also includes elements of socialism and a creed of purpose for the common good. The slogan “Support the Troops,” although arguably a rally cry for rationalizing war efforts has socialist underpinnings. We support the troops because they are our families, neighbors and friends who are making the ultimate sacrifice. Yet, their martyrdom is for a liberal cause: defense of freedom and democracy for the common good.
Conservatism “harks back to the medieval ideal of the close-knit local community, a stable social hierarchy with rank ascribed at birth rather than achieved, dominated by aristocratic paternalism towards the poor, and a network of reciprocal rights and obligations linking benevolent master and deferential servant” (“conservatism”). The modern conservative movement focuses on class distinction, favoring the rule of corporate leaders and wealthy investors. The rights of the poor and middle classes are based on the benevolence of the business community to bless individuals with a job that does not guarantee retirement or livable wages. In addition, conservatives favor “laissezfaire [sic] economics, unregulated capitalism, and minimal state intervention in economic affairs. Whereas organic conservatism emphasizes ‘one nation’, libertarians endorse the individualism of autonomous individuals following their own self-interest, usually on the grounds of individual freedom, social justice, and (long-term) collective welfare.” (“conservatism”). These ideals are usually interpreted politically into protectionist platforms for corporate autocracy and diminished individual rights on the grounds of morality and decency.
Both conservatism and Liberalism stress strong security policies, personal freedom, justice for wrongdoing, and greater economic opportunities. Americans from every faction on the political spectrum generally agree with these goals. Nevertheless, disparities exist amongst these groups concerning how to achieve them, who the beneficiaries should be, and the definition of the terms. Conservatism supports a strong security policy to ensure that America’s preeminence is never jeopardized. The philosophy stresses economic primacy and hostility towards international constrictions. Consequently, conservative legislators push bills that fund military activities and law enforcement efforts. They also pass laws that violate civil liberties, such as the Patriot Act. The concern for conservative legislators regarding personal freedom is usually focused on corporate personhood. In a twist of irony, the rights of the individual are steadily diminished and rendered ineffectual while conservative edicts strengthen the privileges of corporate personhood.
Liberalism supports security with a strong emphasis on human and civil rights. The viewpoint is that security can be achieved without violating the entitlements of individuals. Liberal legislators push to decrease military spending and regulate the private security firms that are employed by business entities. These representatives have been known to pass exploitive bills during times of crisis and even reinstate expiring laws, such as the Patriot Act.
Both conservatism and liberalism support justice but differ on policies such as the death penalty, tort laws, and decriminalization of marijuana. The two dogmas also strive to maintain a viable economy with many job opportunities. Still, conservative representatives seek to remove restrictions like minimum wage, regulatory constraints, and taxes. The underlying principles follow a set of broad tracks. Conservatism is aligned with private industry, economic freedom, American supremacy, traditional values, and Judeo-Christian morals. These can be interpreted as noble if you are upper-middle class or wealthy and American. Alternately, these tenets can be construed as hegemonic and tyrannical if you happen to be anyone else. Liberalism concerns itself with the individual, civil freedom, equality, religious pluralism, and a balance between private industry and worker rights. These ideals have been demonized as socialist agendas that destroy the fabric of society and undermine the American Dream of entrepreneurism.
Conservatism condemns the poor as lazy and liberalism as perpetuating the nanny state. However, the amount spent on subsidies to industries that do not need them far outweighs the cost of public education, welfare, and Medicare. Liberalism strives to meet the needs of the people because America is a society. We are not individuals who happen to exist next to each other. This is a nation and we have a responsibility to every citizen. Hypothetically, if we are to no longer be concerned for the well being of our neighbors then we must also remove the laws that shield us from anarchy.
Yet, this is a nation of laws because we cannot exist without the mutual cooperation of government, private industry and citizen. Businesses cannot survive without workers and consumers, just as these same people need jobs in order to purchase goods. The purpose for liberalism is to ensure a balance between these two players. Since corporations are only concerned with maximizing profits, a government “of the people, by the people, for the people” (Lincoln), must regulate them. Historically, private industry has proven that the well being of workers and consumers is not a priority. Conservatism seeks to deregulate pollution standards to allow private industry to freely contaminate the air, water and soil. Liberalism seeks to place limits and charge an agency with ensuring that the standards are met.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states the battle lines between conservatism and liberalism. The need for this document was a consequence of the fascist activities during World War II, specifically the war crimes of the Nazi regime. The inception of the Declaration was conceived when “the first Human Rights Commission was asked to identify which rights were shared by all human beings” (Ishay 14). While conservatism chastises anyone who invokes these rights, liberalism stands firmly to demand them. Article 23 pronounces that “everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable [sic] conditions of work and to protection against unemployment…without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work… has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection…right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests” (“United Nations”). Although these are reasonable rights that should be afforded to all people, conservatism would have us believe that such standards would infringe upon the rights of private industry under the guise of corporate personhood.
Article 25 declares that “everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control” (“United Nations”). The news is replete with pundits and candidates discussing the elimination of Medicare. These same people want to defund the health care reform under President Barack Obama. They have forgotten the social contract between citizens and private industry.
Our economy is in poor condition. Conservatism uses this as an excuse to undermine the basic rights of the individual. We cannot afford universal health care, yet we can justify pouring billions into the military for two failed wars that seem to have no end. The Supreme Court grants more corporate personhood rights each year, setting precedents and passing binding judgments. Liberalism requires fortitude and conviction. As every citizen struggles to weather this economic crisis, liberalism must withstand the onslaught of attacks to civil liberties. After the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks our nation was under siege from Conservatism as unthinkable policies were pushed through as a knee-jerk reaction. We now face a similar situation. Liberalism buckled in 2001. We cannot allow history to repeat itself. Conservatism is an easier path for anyone willing to give up liberty for basic comfort. Liberalism is a harder path to follow, but it is a noble journey for the common good.
Works Cited
“conservatism” A Dictionary of Sociology. John Scott and Gordon Marshall. Oxford University Press 2009. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. Northeastern Univ. School of Law. n. pag. 12 June 2011
Hall, John A. "Liberalism." The Oxford Companion to the Politics of the World, 2e. Joel Krieger, ed. Oxford University Press Inc. 2001. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. Northeastern Univ. School of Law. n. pag. 12 June 2011
Ishay, Micheline. "The Universal Declaration of Human Rights at 60: A Bridge to Which Future?." Perspectives on Global Development & Technology 9.1/2 (2010): 14. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 2 July 2011.
Lincoln, Abraham. “Abraham Lincoln.” The White House. Office of the President of the United States, n.d. Web. n. pag. 13 Jun 2011.
“The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” The United Nations. The United Nations, n.d. Web. n. pag. 13 Jun 2011.
