Being Right
Jemy Gatdula
Last year I had the good fortune of meeting Lee Edwards at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, DC. The meeting was kindly arranged by Lonce Bailey of the University of Massachusetts Donahue Institute, as part of the US State Department’s Study of US Institutes program for scholars.
Being one of a conservative minority in the group (most of the international gathering of invited scholars self-identifying as liberals), I was gratifyingly thrilled to be meeting one of the foundational figures in modern US conservative history.
But what I particularly remember about the meeting was the disappointment expressed by the liberal members of the group: in almost question after question, on the environment, immigration, and Islamic terrorism, Mr. Edwards would quite invariably end his replies with the phrase “but let’s see how it plays out.”
It irked many in the group for the seeming ambiguity and open-endedness of the reply.
The conservatives, on the other hand, recognized it for what it was: a way of thinking acknowledging that life is more complicated than we could ever comprehend.
And that, in some way, forms a major differentiating factor between conservatives and liberals.
Conservatives are conservatives because they want to conserve. And what we want to conserve is a way of life that has been tested and, though not perfect (what is?), has worked.
It is a belief that what we are right now, our country for example, became what it is (rather than a mere grouping of islands owned by various countries) because of a shared value, tradition, custom, and beliefs (political, religious, and others). That such shared ties were so defined and apt for us group of people that it was strong enough to create a democratic republic.
Conservative Americans would think that way too about their own country, the conservative British in the UK as well, and so on.
Having said that, do conservatives refuse change?
Definitely not.
Conservatives welcome change but not in the same way that liberals do: disruptive, sudden, and without regard to consequences.
Conservatives believe that if any change is to happen, it should not be forced by government, it should be allowed to naturally happen through the people’s acceptance, and should be done prudentially so as to not cause any undue harm to people.
In short, any changes in the social structure and fabric must be done democratically, not rammed down people’s throats by a government or academe that thinks itself knowing more than the people themselves.
It may take years but the consequences of patience would be far better than the devastation that liberal policies have wrought: a multiculturalism (rather than integration) that led minorities to retreat into enclaves and fragmented society, abortion that murdered millions of children (effectively a genocidal policy leveled against the poor), socialistic income redistribution policies that engendered self-entitlement and stifled innovation, welfare policies that bankrupted governments, the re-definition of marriage that indubitably harms the traditional family structure and thus society as a whole.
Conservatism would rather trust the values and principles of society to provide answers, rather than government.
Which means a reliance on the will of the people, confident that a well-formed and virtuous population will eventually be able to effect the necessary changes that will redound for the common good rather than bad.
From the foregoing, one sees the principles of conservatism: trust in individual freedom and free will, that established institutions (the traditional family, neighborhood associations, churches, civil society) have an essential role to play for being closer (and thus more knowledgeable) to the individual (and hence the principle of “subsidiarity”), and a sense of respect and awe about the complexity and magnitude of life and the world, humbly acknowledging that not everything can be captured by data or academic research or social engineering — that something metaphysical must be in play beyond the numbers and statistics.
Hence, the conservative support for free markets (for enabling people to democratically vote for products and services with their own wallets), lower taxes (so people have more resources to do good for themselves, and create businesses and value), the traditional family and marriage (the greatest educational, health, and welfare organization in the world), lesser government (allowing people more control and responsibility over their lives rather than a retarded dependence in bureaucracy), and national sovereignty (protecting the ability of people of common beliefs and values to continue celebrating that unity in commonality).
It is hoped that this column, moving forward, will be able to share what it means to be a conservative. Contrary to what John Stuart Mill once said, conservatism comes from a rich intellectual tradition, from Edmund Burke to Russel Kirk to Thomas Sowell to Roger Scruton.
Hence, despite the hesitation regarding change and with gratitude for the nomenclature, that ironically this column’s ten-year run with Trade Tripper is ended for a column name that hopefully is more reflective of the reality of life’s immensely larger breadth beyond trade.
Jemy Gatdula is a Senior Fellow of the Philippine Council for Foreign Relations and a Philippine Judicial Academy law lecturer for constitutional philosophy and jurisprudence.
jemygatdula@yahoo.com
www.jemygatdula.blogspot.com
facebook.com/jemy.gatdula
Twitter @jemygatdula
