The Economic Libertarian

Ron Paul is reclaiming the term conservative for conservatism. Until recently, the term conservative always seemed like a minor insult when used by anyone not describing themselves. When applied as a self-descriptive, it always seemed like a hopeless utopianism, or like a deliberate lie. For conservatives, it seemed, were either not interested in conserving anything at all. They seemed interested primarily in using the term only to appeal to those who rather liked their life. The ones who were afraid of change, because they liked the status quo.

Look at the term conservative though. Look at how it is used when applied to anything but politics. A “conservative” spender is not someone who doesn’t spend. Nor is it someone who makes sure to spend exactly the same amount month in, month out, so as to maintain the status quo. A conservative spender, instead, is someone who constantly reevaluates their spending to preserve the good while eliminating the bad. Consider also the case of when the word is applied to nature. A nature conservationist is not someone who wants to preserve the status quo against all threats. Quite instead, they want to preserve the good while eliminating the bad (as they percieve things – it varies from one to the next). Nature conservationists often object to invasive species or imbalanced ecologies that threaten the parts they perceive as good.

Next, consider the case of the conservative businessman. This is a grey term, so I’ll clarify. I mean a conservative business style. Conservative businessmen are not the most effective at handling risk, but they’re great at cleaning up messes. They strive always to preserve the good while eliminating the bad. An example of a conservative business policy is to withdraw from areas that turn unprofitable so as to refocus corporate resources into profitable places. Sometimes it can be better to rebuild the areas that slipped, but the conservative policy in this case is always going to be safe and good, even if it is at times not ideal.

Now, let’s move on to the conservative politician. Conservative spending, conservative business, conservative politics. This represents a natural progression perhaps because it can explain what is going on. Most conservative politicians actively emphasize that their policies aren’t optimal, but are instead safe. The point of conservatism isn’t necessarily to have consistently safe results. The point of conservatism is the constant winnowing out process. The point of conservatism is to constantly remove what is bad while keeping what is good. The fact that this results in good, safe results is merely an effect, not a cause. Conservatism is not achieved by focusing on the effect and seeking good, safe results by any means necessary. It’s achieved by focusing on the cause, and seeking to constantly remove the bad while keeping the good.
To tie this back into Ron Paul, he is a politician who stands on the conservative principle of removing programs and policies that have been shown to not work, while standing more cautious on others. He is to political conservatism as careful spenders are to spending conservatism. He represents that winnowing out policy for which conservation is supposed to be known for. For which, in fact, it is known for everywhere but politics.

Ron Paul is the true conservative in this race.

Report This Post

This entry was posted on Thursday, June 7th, 2007 at 5:37 AM and is filed under Politics, Ron Paul. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.