From a somewhat lengthy post at RedState, we are given this quote from Arthur Brooks (AEI) who wrote in the WSJ:
...If Republicans and conservatives double down on the promotion of
economic growth, job creation and traditional values, Americans might
turn away from softheaded concerns about “caring.” Right?
Wrong. As New York University
social psychologist Jonathan Haidt has shown in his research on 132,000
Americans, care for the vulnerable is a universal moral concern in the
U.S. In his best-selling 2012 book “The Righteous Mind: Why Good People
Are Divided by Politics and Religion,” Mr. Haidt demonstrated that
citizens across the political spectrum place a great importance on
taking care of those in need and avoiding harm to the weak. By contrast,
moral values such as sexual purity and respect for authority—to which
conservative politicians often give greater emphasis—resonate deeply
with only a minority of the population. Raw money arguments, e.g., about
the dire effects of the country’s growing entitlement spending, don’t
register morally at all....
OK. Now we switch to Jonah Goldberg:
...As a candidate, Bush distanced himself from the Gingrich
“revolutionaries” of the 1994 Congress, and he criticized social
conservatives such as Robert Bork, who had written an admittedly
uncheery book, Slouching towards Gomorrah.
He talked endlessly about what a tough job single mothers have and
scolded his fellow conservatives for failing to see that “family values
don’t end at the Rio Grande.” As president, he said that “when somebody
hurts, government has got to move.” According to compassionate
conservatives, reflexive anti-statism on the right is foolish, for there
are many important — and conservative — things the state can do right....
...The left talks a big game about helping the bottom half, but its
policies are gradually ruining the economy, which will have catastrophic
results once the safety net is no longer affordable. Labyrinthine
regulations, punitive taxation and wage distortions destroy the ability
to create private-sector jobs. Opportunities for Americans on the bottom
to better their station in life are being erased....
...The American people .... respond to “its morning in America.”
They respond to our greatest days are ahead of us not behind us. They
respond to the fact that this country is a nation of kindness and
optimism. And when it comes to that optimistic spirit that is why the
core issue here is not a green eye shade kind of where we have to
balance the budget and we have to balance this. It has to be growth.
That is what we are talking about. Growing the economy, growing
families, growing communities, growing lives we have the right answers.
We have the right answers not only for the country, not only for our
states, as Arizona is demonstrating, we have the right answers for
individuals and for families and for communities and that is what we
have to be able to do, If we emphasize appealing to people based on
their individual characteristics and decisions not membership in some
kind of group...
And finally to the post's author, Bill S:
And that’s what “compassionate conservatism” was supposed to be
about…not about “No Child Left Behind” or Medicare Part D. It was about
supporting vulnerable people via charities and other organizations,
with a little help from the government. True “compassionate
conservatism” is about empowering charities to help the needy…to enable “little platoons” to assist.
Burke used the term "little platoons" to describe intermediary institutions, churches and schools, clubs and charities that served neighbors.
Too bad the ACLU spiked all that stuff Bush tried with "faith-based initiatives," eh?
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Post a Comment