Before break, a conservative friend suggested that I should read the book "Letters to a Young Conservative" by Dinesh D'Souza '83. While I liked the fact that D'Souza started his book with a discussion of theory and ideology, I was disappointed by his simple and trite characterizations of complex issues. However, the book did illuminate some glaring misconceptions held by conservatives about liberalism.
D'Souza writes, "Liberals tend to believe ... that human nature is intrinsically good" and that "conservatives recognize that there are two principles in human nature -- good and evil -- and these are in constant conflict." This is his first and most glaring mistake. Liberals do not think that all human activities are inherently good, but rather that there is no moral value to actions that people do by themselves. Is there a good or evil judgment when a kid decides to try out for football instead of soccer? The answer is no, and liberals understand that.
Liberals believe that moral values are only applicable when the rights of one individual bump up against the rights of another. Is it good or evil when a company pollutes rivers in order to increase profit? It is evil, and laws should be made to stop it. Is it good or evil for society to provide for the education of its youth? It is good, and funding should be provided to see that it happens. Is it good or evil for one person to assault another? It is evil, and a justice system should be maintained to prevent it.
Liberals recognize that moral judgments are reserved for contact between people, so laws inhibiting freedom should be reserved for only those kinds of actions. If things like theft or murder were legal, society would collapse.
Economic matters including the minimum wage and worker's rights inherently involve contact between individuals and are thus subject to protective legislation. That is why liberals favor government intervention in fiscal matters while not in social matters.
Modern conservatives take the exact opposite approach and combine economic libertarianism with social authoritarianism. D'Souza states that the "vast majority of conservatives" are united in the Platonic belief that there are "moral standards in the universe and that living up to them is the best way to have a full and happy life." If an objective moral code existed, it would make sense to create laws to support it; if abortion were objectively wrong by a universal standard, in all circumstances, it would make sense for the government to ban it. However, no universal moral code exists across history. It is simply ignorant to believe that the moral views someone holds are not dependent on the society in which they live.
D'Souza falls flat on his face because he advocates legislating morality while holding the incompatible belief that "freedom is... the necessary prerequisite for choosing what is right." If morality lies in making the right decisions freely, then by enacting laws that coerce "desirable" behavior, conservatives do not preserve morality, but destroy it.
At the same time, conservatives advocate personal autonomy in economic matters and favor private charities to government welfare. But if people are unfit to make personal decisions, how can they make financial decisions? How can the government be an arbiter of good and evil, but incompetent when it comes to handling money? Such is the conservative's mistake.
