The conscience of a ConservativeGoldwater, Barry M. (Barry Morris)
Philosophy
The conscience of a Conservative
Goldwater, Barry M. (Barry Morris)
Conservatism -- United States; United States -- Politics and government -- 20th century
I know, for I have heard the questions often. Have you no sense of
social obligation? the Liberals ask. Have you no concern for people who
are out of work? for sick people who lack medical care? for children in
overcrowded schools? Are you unmoved by the problems of the aged and
disabled? Are you _against_ human welfare?
The answer to all of these questions is, of course, no. But a simple
“no” is not enough. I feel certain that Conservatism is through unless
Conservatives can demonstrate and communicate the difference between
being concerned with these problems and believing that the federal
government is the proper agent for their solution.
The long range political consequences of Welfarism are plain enough:
as we have seen, the State that is able to deal with its citizens as
wards and dependents has gathered unto itself unlimited political and
economic power and is thus able to rule as absolutely as any oriental
despot.
Let us, however, weigh the consequences of Welfarism on the individual
citizen.
Consider, first, the effect of Welfarism on the donors of government
welfare--not only those who pay for it but also the voters and
their elected representatives who decide that the benefits shall be
conferred. Does some credit redound on them for trying to care for the
needs of their fellow citizens? Are they to be commended and rewarded,
at some moment in eternity, for their “charity?” I think not. Suppose I
should vote for a measure providing for free medical care: I am unaware
of any moral virtue that is attached to my decision to confiscate the
earnings of X and give them to Y.
Suppose, however, that X approves of the program--that he has voted
for welfarist politicians with the idea of helping his fellow man.
Surely the wholesomeness of his act is diluted by the fact that he is
voting not only to have his own money taken but also that of his fellow
citizens who may have different ideas about their social obligations.
Why does not such a man, instead, contribute what he regards as his
just share of human welfare to a private charity?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account