|
Neocons and Big-Government Evangelicals
There are two factions in the Republican Party whose numbers and influence have increased dramatically in the new millennium. These two groups have played a major role in turning the conservative movement on its head because of their proclivity toward using big government to accomplish their objectives. The East Coast liberal Republicans could not ask for better allies in building what Barry Goldwater called a "dime store New Deal."
Neoconservatives, or Neocons for short, are usually former liberals who converted to conservatism during the 1970s and began entering into government when Ronald Reagan became President. Their fortunes advanced dramatically beginning with the George H. W. Bush presidency (1989-1992) and expanded during the George W. Bush administration (2001-2008).
In his 1983 book entitled Reflections of a Neoconservative, Irving Kristol states the Neoconservative agenda, which includes a defense of the traditional liberal position on welfare. However, the major concern of Neocons is foreign policy. They strongly favor US military interventions overseas and becoming the world’s policeman.
On the one hand, expressing a view that Neocons play a more-or-less constructive role in the Republican Party, David Horowitz says,
"Neo-conservatism is a term almost exclusively used by the enemies of America's liberation of Iraq. There is no 'neo-conservative' movement in the United States. When there was one, it was made up of former Democrats who embraced the welfare state but supported Ronald Reagan's Cold War policies against the Soviet bloc. Today 'neo-conservatism' identifies those who believe in an aggressive policy against radical Islam and the global terrorists."
|
On the other hand, Congressman Ron Paul sees their role as a serious danger to our American Republic and says,
“They believe in preemptive war to achieve desired ends...They accept the notion that the ends justify the means-that hardball politics is a moral necessity…They express no opposition to the welfare state...They believe a powerful federal government is a benefit…Neoconservatism is not the philosophy of free markets and a wise foreign policy. Instead, it represents big-government welfare at home and a program of using our military might to spread their version of American values throughout the world.”
|
To the extent that Neocons advocate big government to accomplish their ends, they are indeed not advancing the original principles of the conservative movement. They are mistaken in the notion that America needs an authoritarian government to protect us from international enemies. If we wind up with powerful centralized government, a government that grants us our rights rather than the other way around, who will protect us from it?
Complete isolationism is not the answer, of course, because we live in an age where the danger of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of fanatics who hate America could lead to apocalyptical consequences. Let me offer the following analogy.
Imagine a schoolyard bully who terrorizes everyone except you because you have a black belt in karate. When you prevent him from beating up your best friend by standing between them, the bully tells you that one day he will find a gun and shoot you so you won’t interfere with him again. Sure enough, you see him in a corner of the schoolyard about to exchange cash for a gun that a local gang member is offering. Knowing that he has threatened to kill you when he obtains a gun, you have a moral right (the equivalent of a policeman's probable cause) to intervene and prevent his taking possession of the gun. If you do not exercise that right, the probability is very high that the bully will violate your most fundamental right, i.e., your right to your own life.
So, Neocons add positive value to the conservative movement to the extent that their focus is on the government’s Constitutional responsibility to provide for a national defense. However, the means never justify the ends. The Neocon affinity to welfare statism must be abandoned because it is counterproductive for their desired end of national security. A bankrupt nation drowning in red ink can hardly defend itself.
There is a self-evident truth that seems to elude Neocons. Specifically, America's national military preparedness is powered by capitalism and we would not long remain strong if the freedom of innovation and capital accumulation which characterize capitalism were killed or degraded by socialism or welfare statism. The reason the Soviet empire imploded is not because our spies were better than their spies, but because the USSR could not support a first-rate military establishment on the back of a third-rate (socialist) economy. Barry Goldwater thoroughly understood this in 1964 and President Reagan exploited the USSRs economic weakness in the 1980s to bring an end to the Soviet empire.
Big-Government Evangelicals are strongly focused on moral issues. However, like Neocons, they generally favor using big government to accomplish their ends. Interestingly, just as President Reagan welcomed traditional social conservatives into the Republican Party’s “big tent,” Neocons have sought and openly welcomed the support of Big-Government Evangelicals. As observed by Congressman Paul,
“It’s of interest to note that some large Christian denominations have joined the Neoconservatives in promoting preemptive war, while completely ignoring the Christian doctrine of a Just War.“
|
As with Neocons, Big-Government Evangelicals can contribute in a positive way to the conservative movement only if they abandon their attraction to big-government as a means for achieving their ends. The most positive way to contribute was stated very effectively by Ralph Reed in a 1993 Heritage Foundation Policy Review article entitled “Casting a Wider Net.” The following is excerpted from The Elephant in the Room by Ryan Sager.
“The profamily movement has limited its effectiveness by concentrating disproportionately on issues such as abortion and homosexuality,” Reed wrote. “These are vital moral issues...To win at the ballot box and in the court of public opinion, however, the profamily movement must speak to the concerns of average voters in the areas of taxes, crime, government waste, health care, and financial security.”
|
Reed included an overview of why Christian conservatives should advocate a small-government agenda in order to achieve a profamily agenda. He included the following points.
- High taxes mean less time with children as many mothers must hold a job to make ends meet
- Welfare contributes to the decline of the family, which causes the crime rate to increase
- School choice will give Christian parents an escape from chaotic, immoral public schools
In summary, if the current collaboration of Neocons, Big-Government Evangelicals and old-line East Coast liberal Republicans rules the roost, with no change in heart about the folly of using big-government to achieve "noble" ends, the conservative movement and its dream of limited Constitutional government will soon become a distant memory.
|
