A pyromaniac in a field of straw men

The collectivist agenda is antithetical to America’s premise, which is: Government — including such public goods as roads, schools and police — is instituted to facilitate individual striving, a.k.a. the pursuit of happiness. The fact that collective choices facilitate this striving does not compel the conclusion that the collectivity (Warren’s “the rest of us”) is entitled to take as much as it pleases of the results of the striving.

Because such tutelary government must presume the public’s incompetence, it owes minimal deference to people’s preferences. These preferences are not really “theirs,” because the preferences derive from false, meaning imposed, consciousness. This convenient theory licenses the enlightened vanguard, the political class, to exercise maximum discretion in wielding the powers of the regulatory state.

Warren’s emphatic assertion of the unremarkable — that the individual depends on cooperative behaviors by others — misses this point: It is conservatism, not liberalism, that takes society seriously. Liberalism preaches confident social engineering by the regulatory state. Conservatism urges government humility in the face of society’s creative complexity.

Society — hundreds of millions of people making billions of decisions daily — is a marvel of spontaneous order among individuals in voluntary cooperation. Government facilitates this cooperation with roads, schools, police, etc. — and by getting out of its way. This is a sensible, dynamic, prosperous society’s “underlying social contract.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/elizabeth-warren-and-liberalism-twisting-the-social-contract/2011/10/04/gIQAXi5VOL_story.html

Posted under: Politics
Posted on: Friday, October 21, 2011 10:18 AM
Share this post: email it, bookmark It, digg It, kick It

Comments

  1. Posted by: TByte on 10/24/2011 1:36 PM
    Gravatar
    "Conservatism urges government humility in the face of society’s creative complexity. "
    That's a joke, right?
    The social spectrum that opposed emancipation, suffrage, racial integration, and civil rights for homosexuals now claims a mantle of humility in the face of society's creative complexity?
    And claims it does not endorse social engineering through regulation?
    For true arrogance, that certainly takes the cake.
    I'm always amazed by Will's ability to maintain his head steadfastly in the sand while simultaneously inserting it up his own ass.
  2. Posted by: Pankaj on 10/28/2011 3:27 AM
    Gravatar
    "The social spectrum that opposed emancipation, suffrage, racial integration, and civil rights for homosexuals now claims a mantle of humility in the face of society's creative complexity?"

    Haha.. nice! You got Will back with strawmen of your own. Nice!
  3. Posted by: ArgusEyes on 10/28/2011 7:45 AM
    Gravatar
    @TByte.

    I'm afraid I don't have the American political history chops to either confirm or deny what you said there.

    However, I do agree that for all their posturing about freedom; conservatives aren't coming from a position of freedom. rather, they are being, well, conservative, and that urge to conserve can conserve bad things as well as good. Progressives can progress society towards very bad things as well as good.

    If I were to take one of the two, I'd take the conservative attitude to preserve a good society which has been proven to work better than others. However, my political position is to verify what works and progress towards it. That decision is made on logic and science rather than emotion and base character traits. This makes me a member of the left by the base understanding of that side of the spectrum, but the principles and method differs from the Marxist left.
  4. Posted by: TByte on 11/1/2011 4:56 AM
    Gravatar
    Pankaj, there was no "straw man" in my own post. You're either ignorant of U.S. History, or unclear on the definition of a "straw man" argument. Either way, google is your friend. From here on out, how about serious replies only, please?
  5. Posted by: TByte on 11/1/2011 5:07 AM
    Gravatar
    Argus, I'd guess that both you and I would classify ourselves as socially liberal and fiscally conservative, though considering the mess that conservatives in my government have made of our economy, I prefer the term "fiscally responsible".
    I respect your desire to "preserve a good society which has been proven to work better", but I have no idea what period in my own nation's history might satisfy such a wish. My country has seen fairly steady increases in its economic power and its civil freedoms over the past 50 years, such that there is no prior period which I would prefer over the current status.
    The "Golden Days" are a myth; a fabrication of selective perception regarding the past.
    And, once again, I have to point out that both civil and economic advances have been stymied and opposed by conservatives time and time again. As one example, they are currently opposing stem cell research which is virtually certain to improve lives at some point in the future.
    So, if I were to take one of the two, I'd choose to try new ideas rather than stagnate with the status quo, every time.
  6. Posted by: Pankaj on 11/4/2011 1:53 AM
    Gravatar
    Ah Tbyte, the "google" you cite, is also giving the definition of feminism as
    "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes "

    That and a feminist told me that I am ignorant of Feminist history. Must be true. I better listen to my superiors - you and feminists that is. So I will shut up and you tell me how horrible conservatives are. Since you say they believe in XYZ.. I will take it as Gospel truth.. no wait. Scientific truth. How's that?
  7. Posted by: TByte on 11/4/2011 12:08 PM
    Gravatar
    OMG, the google must be broken! Someone should edit the google right away to fix it! One of the google tubes is clogged, or the google needs to be rebooted.

    Pankaj....
    ....are you telling me you think that emancipation, suffrage, racial integration, and civil rights for homosexuals were supported by mainstream conservatism? Can you be that far in denial?

Post your comment




(this will save your form settings for the next time you comment)

Please add 2 and 7 and type the answer here:

The umbrella in particular is remembered as the symbol of the nineteenth century’s disturbing obsession with individualism. In Bellamy’s utopia, umbrellas have been replaced with retractable canopies so that everyone is protected from the rain equally.
“In the nineteenth century,” explains a character, “when it rained, the people of Boston put up three hundred thousand umbrellas over as many heads, and in the twentieth century they put up one umbrella over all the heads.”