Whither the Conservative Movement? pg. 20
property of the people. By claiming to give back “your money”, President Bush is making an indirect statement that taxation is nothing more than government theft of money that rightly belongs to the individuals. This puts the President on a very different ideological ground than was seen in the earlier conservatives.
Whereas a number of early conservative intellectuals built an ideology of limited government, balanced budgets, and individual liberty, the current President simply rests his argument against taxation on a moral basis. While there is some talk of cutting the deficit, there is no indication that it is an ideological connection and there is no moral tone in addressing it. If the early conservatives are taken at their word that they followed the English Whig traditions, then the current conservatives have abandoned that ideology. The ideology that best fits the rhetoric used by President GW Bush is that of objectivism.
This ideological stand provides a reasonable explanation for the duplicitous nature of the rhetoric on taxation. Even the founder of objectivism could not fully remove the paradox of a philosophy that looked upon taxation as theft and the real world need for a government to fund itself through taxation. Thus, the President shifts his rhetoric to highlight weaknesses in the economy that his tax cuts were supposedly designed to address. Exactly how tax cuts address these weaknesses is never explained because the real reason is the objectivist belief that taxes are morally wrong. The economy is nothing more than cover.
If such a shift has occurred, then it holds huge implications for policy. Objectivist theory holds that the only legitimate use of governmental power it to exercise a monopoly on the use of physical force and an imperative to never be the first to use it. It would follow that the imposition of objectivist policy would entail the complete destruction of practically all non-peace-keeping activities of the government. There is literally no policy area that would be untouched by such a shift. Even many of the legitimate police policies in place would have to be lifted to bring them into line with objectivist demands on reactive use of physical force. The economic and social implications of such a shift are too large to speculate on.
It must be stated that rhetorical analysis on one area of policy does not mean that such a shift is underway, or even imminent. However, taxation is the one policy area that allows government to take action in all other areas. The alternative to broad taxation powers are broad powers of eminent domain where the government is empowered simply to take what it needs from the citizenry. That would mean less liberty, not more. It is, in fact, a descent into tyranny.
In way of conclusion, it should also be pointed out that common wisdom often sees politicians doing things other than what they say they will. As such, too much stock should not be put into just the words. The words must be followed by action. In the area of taxation, this seems to be occurring. Thus, the continued shift to objectivist rhetoric and ideology should be studied rigorously and analyzed thoroughly.
THE END
Click Here to Return to Home Page
Whereas a number of early conservative intellectuals built an ideology of limited government, balanced budgets, and individual liberty, the current President simply rests his argument against taxation on a moral basis. While there is some talk of cutting the deficit, there is no indication that it is an ideological connection and there is no moral tone in addressing it. If the early conservatives are taken at their word that they followed the English Whig traditions, then the current conservatives have abandoned that ideology. The ideology that best fits the rhetoric used by President GW Bush is that of objectivism.
This ideological stand provides a reasonable explanation for the duplicitous nature of the rhetoric on taxation. Even the founder of objectivism could not fully remove the paradox of a philosophy that looked upon taxation as theft and the real world need for a government to fund itself through taxation. Thus, the President shifts his rhetoric to highlight weaknesses in the economy that his tax cuts were supposedly designed to address. Exactly how tax cuts address these weaknesses is never explained because the real reason is the objectivist belief that taxes are morally wrong. The economy is nothing more than cover.
If such a shift has occurred, then it holds huge implications for policy. Objectivist theory holds that the only legitimate use of governmental power it to exercise a monopoly on the use of physical force and an imperative to never be the first to use it. It would follow that the imposition of objectivist policy would entail the complete destruction of practically all non-peace-keeping activities of the government. There is literally no policy area that would be untouched by such a shift. Even many of the legitimate police policies in place would have to be lifted to bring them into line with objectivist demands on reactive use of physical force. The economic and social implications of such a shift are too large to speculate on.
It must be stated that rhetorical analysis on one area of policy does not mean that such a shift is underway, or even imminent. However, taxation is the one policy area that allows government to take action in all other areas. The alternative to broad taxation powers are broad powers of eminent domain where the government is empowered simply to take what it needs from the citizenry. That would mean less liberty, not more. It is, in fact, a descent into tyranny.
In way of conclusion, it should also be pointed out that common wisdom often sees politicians doing things other than what they say they will. As such, too much stock should not be put into just the words. The words must be followed by action. In the area of taxation, this seems to be occurring. Thus, the continued shift to objectivist rhetoric and ideology should be studied rigorously and analyzed thoroughly.
THE END
Click Here to Return to Home Page
© 2004 by Xpatriated Texan
<< Home