When Conservatism is Right

I don't think this is real conservatism. This kind of thinking is about idealizing the past, and being comfortable with going back to how things used to be. True conservatism is about keeping the status quo. As opposed to liberalism which is about change, and doing things that probably have never been done before. 

We can think of these three paradigms as past, present, and future: radical conservatism, conservatism, and liberalism. I think Ron Paul's kind of conservatism is easy to dismiss. The fact is that we have tried it before, and what we are doing now is probably better. Almost every generation of Americans has had a better standard of living than the generation before them. It didn't get like that from us moving radically backwards every time we have a problem. Radically is an important modifier there, because people like Ron Paul are quite radical. Instead of adjusting and fixing what we have, they want us to throw it all out.

Conservatism, on the other hand, is probably the most natural of viewpoints for most people. We can handle the status quo pretty easily, even if we know it isn't ideal. The unknown is scary to most people. Change is feared. It makes us uncomfortable. It gives us anxiety. Our conservatism has probably worked very well for us in many situations throughout human history. The problem comes when people irrationally hold onto the status quo. When people irrationally fear change. Subsequently, those who hold onto the title of conservative are more likely to be intellectually lazy and reason from a more emotional perspective. Conservatives do not need to be rigorous and objective, they have powerful emotional tools at their disposal, which many of them use indiscriminantly and sometimes despicably.

Liberalism, has its own set of problems. Because we are exploring the unexplored, there is of course the possibility of going astray, of making things worse. Even if you don't make things worse, you have people like Ron Paul who idealize the past and then it looks to them like you have made things worse. Liberalism requires the most intelligence, the most imagination, and the most diligence. Liberals must find real, robust solutions to problems that are more than a conservative adjustment. They must share their imagination, their vision of their solution with others and they must be eloquent enough for others to see their vision and see it working. It is a difficult job to have vision. It requires bravery to lead a country through intense changes. The problems that we have now are problems that civilization has had for millenia; there aren't anymore low-hanging fruit in a world of six billion people.

And we do have problems. Many people are content with their lives because the world they live in--their job, their house, their family--is pretty damn good as is (this is probably the main reason why rich people are more often conservative than liberal). What about health care? What about the increasing division between rich and poor? What about the burdensome spending of our military-industrial complex?

The point is, there is a time to be conservative, and it is when we have checked off all of our big problems. After that we can elect people like George Bush and let them play golf and mend fences for their entire term. Then there is a time to be liberal, and that is when the status quo is not acceptable, not sustainable, or simply not the best we can do. Most people would agree that our current status quo fits all three. This is not the time to elect intellectually lazy geriatrics with ignorant apocalypticist running mates. This is the time to elect a smart president who actually has a chance at solving or at least improving many of our collective problems. The country has been mismanaged by silly old men for eight years now. The status quo is the last thing that we need.