8. The Essential Lie of Progressive Liberalism

The essential lie of modern progressive liberalism, the lie at the very heart of Mr. Obama's political philosophy, and the lie I once believed but can no longer is this:  The poor and disenfranchised in our society are where they are because of powerful forces that have put them there and conspire to keep them down for economic gain.  It is too much freedom, the greed and the operation of unfettered capitalism, that results in poverty and political disenfranchisement.  In Mr. Marx's terms, the rich are rich because they extract surplus value from the noble and deserving poor, value that the rich do not rightfully lay claim to.  Or alternatively, as Mr. Obama says, we've tried the market and it hasn't worked.  Because the rich get richer, the poor get poorer.  These are the internal contradictions of capitalism that will eventually lead to its destruction.  If only we could find a leader, young, handsome, perhaps even post-racial, that had the vision. 

The only way to redress this fundamental inequity is to redistribute wealth and opportunity by limiting the property rights and freedom of the haves and transferring their stuff to the have nots.  The agent for this redistribution is necessarily the government.  This redistribution is accomplished in the name of the people, specifically the oppressed, through the threat and if necessary, the execution of legitimate violence.  The constitution is an outdated and restrictive document because, as Mr. Obama himself points out, while it declares what government cannot do to you, it does not define what the government should do on your behalf.  Providing you are one of the oppressed, of course.  GM bond holders need not apply.  They don't need property rights.  After all, they've made enough money.

When I believed these things, I found them delicious.  I had a great cause to give my life meaning.  I also had an enemy that I could, if not hate, dislike very intensely.  I had bad guys.  And if I could turn Jesus into a proto-Marxist a la Gustavo Gutierrez, so much the better.  Life was simple and theoretically elegant.  And, oh yes, I was smarter than everybody else because I had penetrated the veneer and spied the dark forces of economic oppression behind the curtain - the dominant paradigm.  I was the vanguard of the proletariat.  I was...well, special. 

I recently took a trip to Seattle where I saw the Occupy movement breaking out windows in the Wells Fargo bank.  Although there are a relatively few that act out thus, this is the animating spirit of anger and righteous indignation that motivates contemporary progressive liberalism.  Whether it is illegitimate violence in the Seattle streets or legitimate violence imposed from Washington, it is violence in  support of the great redistribution nonetheless.

If you truly believe in your heart of hearts that the inner city poor are where they are because Wells Fargo is exploitative and corrupt, I suppose that anger is justified.  You should definitely vote Obama in 2012 and support him in putting his boot on the throat of whatever corporate industry or sector or ethnicity or class is causing all this mischief.  You need to take their stuff and get it in the hands of the needy, pronto.  We have tried the market and it doesn't work.  Now we need a philosopher king.  The experiment in liberty has failed.  We need violence or the threat thereof.  We need command.  We need control.  We need a visionary to show us the way and shepherd us to the promised land.  A free people cannot be counted on to define their own vision, to heal their own neighbors, to negotiate their own relationships fairly.

If you are a constitutional conservative, on the other hand, that kind of attitude and behavior strikes you as and adolescent, incongruous with your daily experience, and...well...creepy.  You will find more constructive things to do with your time.  Read a book.  Hug your child.  Or do something for the least of your brothers.  Not break a window.  Not take some rich guy's money away.

7. The Central Truth of Constitutional Conservatism

These initial reflections in posts 1-6 have lead me to confront a central truth and a central lie and the political/moral implications that flow therefrom.  Judge for yourself whether or not you agree with me.

The essential truth at the heart of constitutional conservatism is that imperfect and inequitable though it might be, our society provides abundant opportunity for anyone to enjoy a satisfying lifestyle assuming that they make reasonable decisions and are of sound mind and body.  The reason this opportunity exists is because we have a system of political economy that emphasizes the dignity, autonomy, liberty, and property of the individual.  By jealously guarding these principles, we have unleashed individual creativity and initiative on an historically unprecedented scale.  This is how abundance is created.  This is how economies grow.  In fact, it is the only way.

In this view, the primary moral obligation of the government is to continually protect these God-bestowed rights, the day-by-day execution of which by a functional citizenry produces this abundance and opportunity.  Conversely, the primary moral obligation of the citizenry is -- after having established a sound personal scaffolding for themselves by studying hard, working hard, marrying well, and saving money -- to use their personal abundance  in order to provide for individuals who truly cannot provide for themselves (the safety net) and to teach those who are missing out on an abundant life because of a skills deficit (mentorship).  As Bill Bennett once said succinctly:  learn, earn, serve.

If I were to interview 1,000 individuals who truly were the downtrodden, the least of my brothers, I believe I would discover two tribes.  Tribe one would consist of people who were in their situations because they were part of the tragic tenth -- the mentally or physically wounded individuals who cannot fend for themselves -- or the temporarily unlucky.  This is the safety net tribe.  It is the tribe that the functional and fortunate 90% are capable and happy to take care of from their abundance.  But then, I would also discover another tribe.  A tribe equally in need of support and compassion, but a tribe that need not be.  A tribe that can grow large enough to overwhelm the functional, productive members of society.  This is the tribe that exists because its members have made poor decisions.  Not evil decisions.  Not intentionally self-destructive decisions.  But poor decisions, consistently, throughout the course of their lives. 

Moreover, I would find that in most cases, they made poor decisions because they simply had not been given the cultural wherewithal to make good ones.  I would find that overwhelmingly the culprit lay with their families of origin.  I would find that they had parents who did not see parenting as their primary moral responsibility, who did not themselves possess the skills to pass on to their children no matter how much they loved them, or both.  I would encounter a tragic litany of the dispossessed:

• I would see adult children who had grown up in homes without a functional mother and father who loved them and each other  
• I would see adult children who grew up in homes where their parents were not professionally successfully, who did not know how to develop professional skills, did not possess a work ethic, did not know how to find a job, to keep a job, to relate to their coworkers, to impress their bosses, and to move up the economic ladder  

• I would find adult children who grew up in homes where their parents knew nothing about money: about its importance, how to save it, how to invest it, how to budget, how to make wise purchasing decisions. 

• I would find adult children who grew up in homes where their parents did not know how to deal with intense human emotions like anger, fear, disappointment, and sadness; who did not know how to manage human appetites for food, for mood and mind altering substances, for romance and sexuality 
• I would find adult children who grew up in homes where their parents did not value and know how to achieve education,  how to study, how to savor ideas and their expression, how to cultivate the life of the mind, how to apply for college and financial assistance, how to exploit the tremendous resources that colleges provide
• I would find children who grew up in homes where their parents did not  know how to maturely love and cherish other people, where a mother and father did not look at each other with an abiding love in their eyes, where a mother and father did not convey to their children that those children were a source of delight and that their parents, along with the universe, was glad to have their company

In short, I would find a wounded tribe that was forever beyond the reach of government succor and largesse.  It is a tribe whose pain Bill Clinton cannot possibly feel, let alone redress.  And given that Mr. Clinton was many times the politician that Mr. Obama ever will be, it is certainly a pain that our community organizer cannot heal. 

It is, however, precisely the kind of pain and need that poses the core questions at the heart of all the world's great religions.  It is the tribe that, in the Christian faith, Jesus died for and whose pain he did feel as his life dwindled on the cross.  And in feeling that pain, he did not seek to organize them.  He died for them.  And he expected his followers to care for them.  It is the tribe whose pain that only a just and good community of 300 million or so free and functional people - whatever their faith - might just be able to do something about.  If they retain the liberty to do so.

6. Does Freedom Work (Part II)?

If you are a constitutional conservative, you believe freedom works.  You believe in free enterprise.  This is simply the notion that people have the right to their own stuff - be they part of the 99% or the 1%.  You believe that unless they are forced, defrauded or victimized by a monopoly, free people do not give up their stuff unless someone provides them value in return.  If you want to get rich in a society of free people, you spend a great deal of time figuring out how to provide other people with value.  You don't really care about their pigment, their genital configuration, their accent or what they do behind closed doors.  If you want to be rich, you need to get their stuff.  In the form of money.  In exchange for value.  Lots of value.

In such a world, consequently, we admire the 1%.  We do not envy them, hate them, or try to get their stuff.  Nor do we make ridiculous statements such as Mr. Obama did when he said "I do think at a certain point, you've made enough money."  If I make my money by selling a free people something valuable at a good price such as a computer that helps them learn and grow, at what point, Mr. Obama, have I made enough money?  To whom should I not sell a computer?  Maybe that inner city kid.  After all, I've made enough money.

If I make my money by hiring people who would otherwise not be employed, enabling them to provide for their families and send their children to college, at what point, Mr. Obama, have I made enough money?  Whom should I not hire?  Maybe that inner city father.  After all, I've made enough money.

If I make my money by providing investors with a just return that enables them to stay retired, to provide their children with an inheritance, to live with dignity in their elder years, at what point, Mr. Obama, have I made enough money?  Whom should I deprive of a return on their hard earned investment capital?  Maybe that grandmother who inched her way out of the inner city through a lifetime of hard work.  After all, I've made enough money.

People who believe freedom works and see the government's key role as a conservator of that freedom do not make such statements.  Mr. Obama did.  It is not an American statement.  It is not a statement that a free people should expect from their president and it should disturb them.  How much we make isn't his business.  Neither is it his money.

5. Does Freedom Work (Part I)?

I'd ask you to consider the premise that sums up my thinking in these first few entries:  Freedom works.  The reason why we as a nation have made this amazing leap in a such a short time is that we developed a system of political economy that respects the dignity, liberty, and autonomy of the individual.  Only in so doing do we create a climate in which individuals thrive, express their creativity and passion, and create the kind of abundance and opportunity that we enjoy.  It is a society in which irrespective of our parents, our neighborhood, our gender, or our ethnicity, the greatest obstacle to success is ourselves. 

If you believe freedom works, you naturally fall into the camp of the constitutional conservative.  You believe that government's primary role is to protect God-given rights, not invent new rights such as a right to healthcare or a right to free condoms.  In fact, in the classic American view (borrowing from Locke's Second Treatise on Civil Government), government is not even a party to the social contract.  Rather that is a contract struck between free citizens who agree to divide up the physical, intellectual, and emotional labor of being human in order to derive mutual benefit.  Rights are God's to ordain through creation, not government's to invent in order to garner popular support and win elections.

Government is a derivative mechanism rendered necessary by the fact that men are not angels and just might not keep their contracts.  Government does not exist to provide a vision for a better future of hope and change, it is a necessary evil that should be viewed with suspicion because it holds a monopoly on the exercise of legitimate violence.  Government at its best provides a context in which 300 million Americans can conceive and pursue 300 million unique visions.  Free people do not look to Barney Frank, Anthony Weiner or Richard Nixon for their meaning in life.  They find their own.  They expect their government to let them.

4. Bureaucracy and Justice

I can't wait until the same bureaucratic mindset demonstrated here is in charge of all our health care decisions.  Paradise awaits:

http://www.myfoxorlando.com/video?clipId=7331648&autoStart=true

3. The Uncomfortable Comforting Truth

There is a fundamental truth I would ask you to consider.  To me, it is essential.  If I did not believe this, I could not be conservative.  Conversely, if you do believe it, then I argue it is inevitable to conclude that not only is a great deal of our current public policy wrong, it is destined to fail, and it is why we are going broke.  So you tell me, am I right or am I wrong.  Should I switch sides and line up behind Mr. Obama?

This is the core truth I would want my child to embrace.  It is what I would teach my students.  It is what I would share with someone down on their luck, confronting personal failure.  It is what I would tell someone from the inner city facing economic and social obstacles to their success.  It is what I would tell someone who had been victimized by the greed, callousness, racism or sexism of others.

I believe that I am stunningly fortunate through an accident of birth to be living in the United States in the early years of the 21st century.  I believe I am living in a society that has achieved something rare and magnificent.  It is a society in which barring misfortune or infirmity anyone can reasonably succeed and enjoy an historically unprecedented standard of living.  That is, one need not make heroic choices, know the right people, or be a winner of life's lottery; one need only make sound moral decisions.  Consider this quote from Ron Haskins in his article in National Review, May 3, 2010:

"The fact that personal responsibility plays a major role in mobility and economic well-being can be easily demonstrated.  The three basic rules of success in America are that young people should finish their educations (at least high school), get jobs, and get married before having children.  Computations based on Census data that my Brookings Institution colleague Isabel Sawhill performed for our recent book, Creating an Opportunity Society, shows that kids who follow these rules have a 74 percent chance of winding up in the middle class (defined as income of $50,000 or more) and a mere 2 percent chance of winding up in poverty ($17,200 for a family of three in 2008).  By contrast, young people who violate all three of these rules have only a 7 percent chance of winding up in the middle class and a 76 percent chance of winding up in poverty."

Stunning.

The overwhelming fact is that we are incredibly lucky to be living in a society wherein if you study hard, work hard, treat people fairly, save money, marry intelligently, and have a service orientation, you will most likely succeed.  In medieval Europe, most people could not read, lived hungry, cold lives, shared the same physical dwelling with their animals if they were lucky to have any, and died young. Today, the biggest barriers to success are a skills deficit and stupid choices.

It follows that the biggest single contribution we can make to helping people succeed is to provide them with the skills they need to access the abundant opportunity all around them.  I would teach anyone struggling to find success and happiness to get up every day and ask a single question:  How can I provide value for someone today?  It has nothing to do with the 1%, the oil companies, bankers or Wall Street fat cats.  People do not need the playing field leveled, they do not need to rely on a philosopher king to take care of them, and they certainly do not need America to be fundamentally transformed, thank you.  They simply need to make better choices that unlock their inner, God-given potential.

Will there always been a tragic tenth, the physically and mentally wounded, the unfortunate souls?  Of course.  And we should take care of them humanely and with love.  But the tragic tenth will not drive a wealthy nation into bankruptcy.  It is when a significant percentage of the population loses the capacity for self-reliance that you eventually run out of other people's money.  This is a problem of character and all the class warfare in the world won't solve it.  It will, however, get you one hell of a deficit.

2. The Pain of Uncomfortable Truth

When I say that we are on the verge of becoming People of the Lie, I don't mean it in a malicious or insulting way.  By that statement, I mean two things. 

First, as humans, we are naturally liars.   Above all, we are programmed to lie to ourselves about things that cause us pain.  This makes us dysfunctional.   The first step to becoming whole is confronting painful truths about ourselves.  Some never do that and spend lives being much less than they could be.  They perpetually find self-congratulatory fault with the universe, society, western civilization, dead white men, their parents, their bosses, their ex-spouses, their children, people of a particular color, gender, or status, corporations, bankers, oil companies, fat-cat bankers, the 1%, the dominant paradigm, God, anybody but themselves. To rephrase Mr. Obama, they cling bitterly to their comfortable delusions with antipathy for the truth that the fault most likely lies not with their stars but with themselves.  This is not helpful.  

Second , I have come to the conclusion that there is something unique about modern liberalism that taps into this natural human propensity to lie in order to avoid pain, ours or someone else's.  However, this well intentioned desire often does damage to people.  Time and again, this desire to eliminate pain has harmed the people it purports to help:  Tragically, the most vulnerable and least among us.  Conversely, I have found that there is something about conservatism that challenges me to embrace uncomfortable truths - most importantly, about myself.  Because of this, although conservatism takes effort, courage, and maturity, it offers me the opportunity to become more as an individual. I would argue that as we teeter on the verge of national bankruptcy... for the first time in recent history, confronting the possibility of national insolvency, it is time to start confronting painful truths.

I came to this conclusion over many years as a consequence of understanding both philosophies and having at different times in my life embraced both philosophies.  As I grew up and gained wisdom, I reflected on the liberal beliefs of my young adulthood, the beliefs espoused by people like Mr. Obama.  I came to the conclusion that once one drilled down beneath abstractions about poverty, capitalism, fundamental fairness, and blood-for-oil, in order to believe what liberals believe, I usually had to believe things that simply weren't true.  In the coming entries, I want to explore such things.  I invite you to contradict me if I am wrong.

Nothing exemplifies this more than those painful and unintentionally embarrassing interviews with members of the Occupy movement.  I don't like watching them because I don't like seeing (probably nice) people make fools of themselves.  It is uncomfortable.  Still, it is instructive.  Typically, these interviews reveal a juxtaposition of sophisticated abstractions straight from Sociology 101 about corporate greed, exploitation, racism and imperialism mixed with a lack of coherence and concrete understanding of those things about which they speak.  Nice and well intentioned though these people might be, they are classic fools in the Socratic sense.  Pumped full of bracing academic knowledge and an impressive vocabulary, they  truly do not know what they do not know, much like Obama himself, and this is dangerous.  I argue it is why we are where we are.