What is a “Conservative?” What is a “Liberal?”

Although I am best known for my published work in advocacy for people in pain, I have read a great deal and written on other subjects for more than 34 years in online bulletin boards and more recently social media. My commentaries or comments have been downloaded from Quora.com 5.4 million times since October 2019.

Thus this observation:

What is a “Conservative?” What is a “Liberal?”

Richard A Lawhern, PhD

July 30, 2024

[Posting to Social Media]

We live in times that are polarized along many different axes of public and private life – political, economic, emotional and spiritual.  In these contexts, we often hear the terms “conservative” or “liberal”; “right-wing” or “left-wing”.  Americans seem to live in particular horror of buzz words like “socialist” or “communist” or “collectivist”.  But one very much doubts that many of us understand what those buzz words actually mean.  

Historically, the term “political conservative” has been taken to mean a person who is deeply suspicious of “too much” government.  The phrase "a government large enough to satisfy all our needs is large enough to take all we have" is often mis-attributed to Thomas Jefferson, but there is no evidence that he ever wrote or said it. The earliest known appearance of this quote in print dates back to 1952, and it has been used by various politicians since then, including Gerald Ford and Barry Goldwater.  

Goldwater also said that “extremism in defense of liberty is no vice.” Perhaps today we are seeing the inevitable results of this kind of thinking in the extremities of our shared public life. 

It seems fair to ask what a “Conservative” is these days.  It can be argued that the term no longer refers to someone who actually wants less government.  A more accurate definition might be that they want less government for themselves and more government for other people. 

Everybody seems to like getting the government "out of our hair" by starving it with tax cuts.  But they also bemoan increasing Federal budget deficits.  When we ask citizens what Federal expenses they want to cut back, they often mention foreign aid – less than 1% of the budget.  Over half of the US Federal budget is in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.  Defense is 15%.  Interest on debt is 7%.  Add them up, and only 15% of the budget remains in non-defense discretionary spending. 

How many of us want to cut funding for federal departments and agencies such as parks, farm subsidies, education, transportation, or scientific research?  The Devil is in the details!

Religious conservatives and evangelicals want governments to ban abortion (and in some cases birth control) for all women.  Political conservatives want to change or abolish the US Constitution to favor a dictatorial President who would be exempt from prosecution for all crimes committed while in office.

“Liberal” or “Progressive” politicians see government as a necessary agent in the correction of social inequities and enforcement of individual civil rights.  By contrast, far “right wing” actors sometimes indulge outright violence to deny such civil rights to people of color whom they regard as their inferiors or competitors for privileged status. Both groups seek to influence government policy in favor of their beliefs over those of others.

Missing from this dynamic is a widespread but generally unremarked reality:  the power of money.  It is sometimes said that “money has no morality – it has only self-interest.”  Nowhere is this more obvious than in our contemporary politics. 

In democracies, money buys political candidates exposure in media, without which “grass-roots" political or social movements cannot thrive.  It is common for wealthy political donors to play all sides of the street, expecting to later influence public policy (particularly taxation) that affects their bottom line.  But poor people do not play in this game.  The top 10% of US households hold over two-thirds of all household wealth.  The bottom 50% hold only 3% of total wealth.  The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer.

Public policy on taxation has promoted this outcome.

It can be argued compellingly that to most intents and purposes, statesmanship and integrity no longer exist in our politics.  America has become a “kleptocracy” of the rich who effectively control government. “Conservatism” has come to be an excuse for the triumph of short-term thinking and economic self-interest over human welfare or even survival. Liberals seem to have their hearts more often in the right place, but they are no more interested than Conservatives in volunteering their own money to pay the bills.  

America and the world are facing multiple deadly crises in the next 20 years that can only be solved if we work together and make huge investments of public funds.  The alternatives are “change or die.” 

Most money in private hands doesn’t “care” about even survival; only short term gain.  And public funds are grossly inadequate when rich political donors refuse to allow themselves to be taxed, or to pay people who actually produce their prosperity – their corporate employees – a living wage. 

Inadequate taxation has also created an imminent collapse of social security systems around the world.   Global climate change is causing rising ocean levels, horrendous flooding and droughts that reduce even our ability to feed our world.  There are many other pending disasters.

But still governments dither, serving their rich constituents rather than changing to survive.  In the words of the immortal cartoon character Pogo in 1970, “We have met the enemy… and he is us!”   If our children and grandchildren are to survive, then all of us must adopt a new attitude: 

“Let change begin with me.”  Not tomorrow. Today. Right now!