What do conservatives want, exactly?

The political spectrum in the United States has long varied to some extent from those in the rest of the developed world. While the Democrats are host to a range of ideological stances that range from the traditional left to the center-right, the Republicans and those with associated or similar positions hold many beliefs that are, shall we say, not considered acceptable in the other G-20 countries.

The sanctity of entitlement programs and other forms of direct government assistance, essentially free education through the university level, acceptance of climate change, the necessity of strong government intervention in the economy in times of recession and universal single-payer health care are all accepted as canon in Europe, a place that not coincidentally is weathering this storm, save for the Greeks and their financial shenanigans and the Spanish housing bubble, much better than we are. The fact that these items are still seen as controversial and remain under heated debate in the United States is frankly stunning, and the rest of the world had a bad taste left in their mouth by our dysfunction after our embarrassing showing in Copenhagen, where we promised to show up with legislation passed ready to sign an agreement. Needless to say, we failed on both accounts.

In the time that has passed since President Obama was inaugurated, several large and diverse groups of conservatives have become very vocal in their opposition to almost every government program and initiative under the sun. While they range pretty widely on the ideological scale, from center-right (by United States definitions) to the far right, they definitely share at least two firm convictions. The first is that the government is far too large and spends too much, especially when it tries to help (poor/disadvantaged/struggling) people or do anything that could possibly have a negative or restrictive effect in any way on their precious free market system. Yes, the very same free market system that just plunged our economy into the worst recession in eighty-odd years, a recession that only narrowly avoided becoming an outright global disaster thanks to varying degrees of large-scale governmental financial stimulus into economies across the developed world. The second near universal conservative belief is some desire for increased civil liberties, although they seem the types to favor the strict law enforcement that has resulted in our exploding prison populations.

The part that I fail to understand, however, is what they hope to accomplish with their proposed “reforms.” Some speak of a nebulous “simpler time,” a place that exists only in memory. How much simpler are we talking here? Before civil rights legislation? Pre-New Deal? Before the destruction of the robber barons and the implementation antitrust acts? Maybe even earlier, who knows. Regardless of whatever idyllic fantasy land they strive for, it isn’t happening. I’m sure they don’t think that having a tiny government that lacks significant power to intervene in the economy and assist those in need will somehow transform society to their ideal. In fact, I’d argue that, notwithstanding the still necessary energy, transportation, education, finance, and immigration reforms our country needs to address a number of rather pressing issues, and not counting the bevy of desperately required changes to the political system, what is currently in place is largely a reflection of society’s progress to this point.

Let me get hypothetical for a moment here. Let’s say that the Republicans and/or other conservatives were swept into large majorities, and given free reign to enact their agendas. In the wake of such a political sea change, one could expect huge tax cuts to be enacted, great swaths of public spending reduced, entitlement programs cut away or altogether eliminated, save for a few months of unemployment insurance and Medicare, Social Security privatized along with a variety of other government services, and all regulatory measures deemed unnecessary overturned. What would the sum of the implementation of all these desired governmental changes be? Something would have to fill the void. I can tell you right now that the most evil and self-serving people alive would seize the moment to become predators in the absence of regulation. That has happened before, hence the existence of said regulations. It happened in the last decade, when regulations on Wall St. implemented after the savings and loan crisis that struck from the late ’80s to the beginning of the ’90s were repealed, and taxes and the interest rates at the Fed reduced, with both contributing greatly to the housing and credit bubbles and the subsequent collapse of our economy. It is also hard to deny that the conservative mantra of hard work and no guarantees beyond equality of opportunity, and even then only from the moment of birth, would quickly lead to the rapid descent into destitution of those who already struggle along through our poverty-stricken urban areas. How many downturns of the business cycle would it take for the economy to irrecoverably collapse?

What those who argue for these things seemingly fail to realize is that nearly everything that exists in government was created, at least in theory, to address a problem that needed fixing in either American society or the economy. Certainly we can agree that there are things no longer needed in government, but they are not the same things that the conservatives so frequently and passionately rail against. Business has long thrived in Europe, whose countries have far more progressive, democratic socialist governments, and whose people are much better protected from the economic crises that inevitably strike any state.

I personally feel that a lot can be inferred from the differences in the respective mottos of the United States and France. While we are guaranteed life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the French strive for liberté, égalité and fraternité, or in less scientific terms, freedom, equality and brotherhood. Ours may certainly have a nice ring to it, but what does it really mean other than Americans can live, be free and attempt to reach happiness? That doesn’t sound like much of a promise to me. The contrast between the two is reflected by society in the decidedly individualistic streak that many Americans pride themselves on, and the far more communitarian nature of France, and Europe as a whole for that matter.

I have been at a loss thinking about these things. It keeps me up at night. I just really struggle to believe that conservatives are striving for a more perfect society for all with their plans.