Seven precepts for making America as conservative as we think we are

Ryan Streeter
Follow Ryan on Twitter

Yesterday, I pointed out that it’s ironic that we Americans consider ourselves conservative while we elect people who raise the nation’s debt limit above America’s entire GDP.

How can such conservative people allow such liberality with the nation’s checkbook? We may not be as conservative as we think we are.

This raises the bigger question of what we Americans mean when we respond to Gallup polls saying we are “conservative.” What exactly is the conscience of a conservative all about these days?

Whatever we mean by “conservative,” it’s clear that the old connotation suggesting frugality has gone out the window. We Americans – both in our government and in our private lives – have not been conservative in our spending over the past decade or two.

And yet it’s pretty important that we conservatives remind ourselves what – in times like these – we mean when we say we are “conservative.”

So what to believe if you’re a conservative? Here are seven precepts for starters:

First, reduce debt, across the board. American families held less debt than their income in the 1990s (debt was 85% of their income, on average). Now, we hold more: 114% of income, on average. This number has dropped since the recession began, but it’s still precariously high.

Second, save more. This should go hand in hand with debt reduction. Savings has been in a long downward trend since 1980. While the recession has increased savings, as recessions often do, increasing the role of savings over consumption as a cultural value is something of a cultural imperative that conservatives should embrace.

Third, reclaim the connection between work and vocation. One of the most troubling, yet under-reported, trends in America right now is detachment from the labor market – a trend that began before the recession. The rising generation needs to believe it’s worth it to work, to produce, even to launch an enterprise. Conservatives have long believed work is not just what you get up and do each day, but a way of contributing to society and following a deeper calling. The value of work doesn’t get as much copy today as it should.

Fourth, reclaim self-sufficiency. This follows from the previous point. Conservatives have promoted self-sufficiency in welfare reform. Now, more than ever, it needs to be a publicly shared value as people look to the future of entitlement reform. As much as possible, we should work hard to make ourselves as independent in the future as possible. See point two.

Fifth, promote true independence. You’re never truly self-sufficient if you’re living at home as an adult when you don’t need to. Households are forming at a disturbingly low rate because younger people are living at home and not marrying. Some of this is because of the economy, but something else cultural is going on. Conservatives should be promoting the values of early independence and the habits it requires (see points one through four).

Sixth, be pro-future. Russell Kirk wrote, “Any public measure ought to be judged by its probable long-run consequences, not merely by temporary advantage or popularity.” Right now, Republicans are the only party talking seriously about the future. But conservatives as a whole need to work to create the same urgency about our social and economic future that environmentalists achieved through climate change advocacy, so that America’s fiscal future becomes a shared concern.

Seventh, be pro-child. The Left always champions itself as the pro-child lobby, and conservatives let them. But the left seems just fine with running babies off the cliff in the same manner they accuse conservatives of doing with grandma. The rising generation has the most to lose with liberalism, and the most to gain with conservatism, these days. This should be a loud and prevailing theme in public discourse, at church, around the dinner table, and in school hallways (because you can be pretty sure it won’t be in the classroom – not public ones anyway).

If more of America embraced these seven conservative precepts, we as a nation would be as conservative as we say we are in the polls.

Comments

[Paul Simpson]

Very interesting and clear statements. However, they are surely incompatible with the Christianity of the New Testament. Where is the responsibility for the poor and vulnerable and equal treatment for all? Nowhere. Very disappointing. If Christian Conservatives think that this was Jesus' philosophy they either haven't read the New Testament or they have misunderstood it.

[Christopher Heward]

Whilst writing this, Paul has got in there and much more succinctly said what I've written below. I am a Christian, but even those who aren't can surely see the need, indeed obligation, to help those who are adversely affected by the mechanisms that govern our society's interactions? Thanks :)

------

We need true interdependence as well as independence (and indeed more-so than) I believe, as much as I agree with the sentiment of that point. I agree people need to stand on their own two feet, but only so that they can then help others.

We have a lot of people in this country, and I get the impression in the US too, that believe that even though their parents were rich and then they used this money to buy a good education, have good healthcare, a nice home, etc., that despite all of this, their money was entirely 'earned'. What about those not afforded the same opportunities in early life, who then despite working as hard, if not more so, will never receive as much remuneration?

And this is the danger with some of the implications of your points (whilst generally agreeable) - where is the room to help those born into less fortunate circumstances? Are we saying that they received as much as they had earned too? So they were worthy of half of what those born into fortunate circumstances were worthy of? (I'm not saying this is necessarily what you believe, but is what is implied by a lot of conservatives I speak to.) This is even more pronounced when looking at a global scale and matters of intentional aid and debt relief.

This is something I repeatedly see in conservatives - a belief that everything they have is because they've 'earned' it. I'm sorry but this is either arrogant, ignorant, or straight up lies.

Of course, I think we've seen in the UK that increasing socialism doesn't necessarily help this and can make matters worse. Indeed, I'm not looking for people to change their methods per sé, and the state really isn't a great solution, but let's at least acknowledge that how much we earn is, in general, much more determined by the circumstances we are born into and brought up in, and other matters of good fortune beyond our control, than by effort and hard-work.

[Christopher Heward]

Just a couple of other things (if I may! :D)

As I said, your points are generally agreeable, but we must dig deeper. Why, for example, do people spend increasingly more money than they have at their disposal? There are two reasons I can see.

Firstly, the cost of living is rising by more than many peoples' incomes are, meaning just maintaining their standard of living is difficult without borrowing more/saving less (either because it is already at a minimum or because it is hard to lower your standard of life - and I see a lot from the American right about maintaining and improving 'the American way of life').

Secondly it is because the Western world is increasingly caught up in the spirit of the age - consumeristic individualism.

Again, both of these are influenced by the rich. Why? On the first one, as people get richer, they tend to get lazier and more wasteful because they can afford to. Why waste time recycling when you can just pay to have bins removed? Why use a bus or walk when you can pay for a car and copious amounts of petrol? Why think about how much food to buy when if you buy too much you can just chuck it away? Not only this, but when you get richer you decide to buy another car, or a holiday home, more household appliances, etc. etc. But we need to realise that this affects other people. The more we pollute the earth, the more it affects the poor who can't pay for things that protect them from the negative consequences. The higher the price of food is. The greater the cost of oil and therefore public transport or a small car to get to work to earn the pittance they receive. The harder it is to buy any home let alone a second one.

With the second point, why is consumerism so rife? Because if it wasn't all these products wouldn't sell. And who would this harm if the products didn't sell? Those with money invested in the companies involved in the manufacture and distribution of these goods and services. And who's money is this? The rich, whether it be through direct ownership, stocks and shares or private pensions. It is in the 'shareholders' interest' for the company to convince everyone that they need to buy their products at whatever the cost, even if they can't afford it.

So I guess my point is that the rich have an obligation to not be wasteful and to over-consume, and also to invest their money (and time and energy) into endeavours that help, or at the very least don't disadvantage, those who are less fortunate. We must put pressure on fund managers to invest in ethical things, and also turn our backs on products that are produced or sold in an unethical way.

This again comes back to this thing of independence versus interdependence. The spirit of the age tells us that the harder we work the more independence we can buy, but the truth is we can never be anything but interdependent - it's what we were made to be! We can ignore it but there are some that can't because it shapes their lives.

[Stephen W]

If Conservatives cared even slightly about reducing the debt they would swallow their dislike and agreed to raised taxes.

They don't and they haven't. They would much rather America drown in debt than see a single millionaire pay another cent in taxation.

They have thrown financial prudence out the window. And the result is that they don't have a moral leg to stand on.