McCain Offers REAL Change

Conservatism would offer political change
John F. McLaughlin • Special to The Desert Sun • September 13, 2008

There's been much talk lately about introducing political change in Washington. Yet, upon examination, most of what is being called “change” looks just like more and larger doses of the same. I suggest that, in today's political environment, it is conservatism that offers real political change.


Webster's dictionary defines a conservative as “one who opposes hasty changes in the political, religious or civil institutions of the country.” Modern conservatism now means more than that.

Conservatives today seek positive objectives rooted in important principles of governance.

(1) All humans are born equal under the law but cannot be assured of equal outcomes in life;

(2) Humans derive inherent and inalienable rights from their Creator — not from men — and among those are the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit (but not necessarily the attainment) of happiness; and

(3) Humans establish governments to protect those rights from enemies foreign and domestic — not to create new “rights.”

Based upon those principles and after a struggle lasting some 13 years, the Founding Fathers established a unique Constitution for the U.S. government. The original document began with the words “we the people” and ended with 10 amendments limiting the power of the central government.

The original Constitution contained numerous flaws — most of which were corrected over the next 150 years (and not without bloodshed). The resulting great “American experiment” of a free people living in a federal republic of sovereign states has proved successful beyond all historical measures. However, another concept of governance — the ages-old idea of central government control — threatens that American experiment.

People, alarmed at a record of continuing failure — particularly in the last 50 years — of more and ever-larger programs seeking centralized “collective” solutions to societal problems, now form the modern “conservative” movement.

Conservatives believe that only individuals — millions of them — unshackled by overreaching federal or state governments make choices best for themselves and their families. Their ingenuity, entrepreneurship and hard labor reap benefits not only for themselves but for society as a whole — results not producible by government bureaucrats.

In essence, conservatives believe in individual freedom (including the freedom to make bad decisions) with as little government control as possible.

Conservatives are NOT “anti-government.” They recognize government must maintain order, provide national security from foreign and domestic threats, and administer justice — including preserving individual rights. However, in stark contrast to liberals today, conservatives believe government (including an activist judiciary) cannot coercively solve societal problems. Only individuals can solve problems if government just gets out of the way.

Such freedom ensures boundless opportunities but not equal outcomes. Individuals and businesses enjoy differing levels of success — clearly providing the incentive to do better.

Liberals see inequality in the free enterprise system and demand that it be rectified — by punishing achievers. They use government coercion via taxation or regulation to redistribute wealth inconsistent with a free society, seeking “equality” by making everyone equally miserable.

While cloaking their actions in noble intentions, they diminish incentives to succeed, promote widespread dependency on a government bureaucracy they seek to control, and destroy civility as different segments of society fight over ever-increasing government largesse.

History shows entrepreneurial capitalism promotes wealth and prosperity. Big government policies advocated by the current “liberal” or “progressive” derivatives of socialism fail every time they're tried. The socialist credo “from each according to his ability — to each according to his need” repeatedly destroys the human spirit. The only individuals who do well under such systems become those who decide from whom to take and to whom to give. Such individuals cannot call themselves “conservative.”