Milton Friedman said: “There are still intellectuals who believe that concentrated power is a force for good so long as it is in the hands of men of good will. I’m waiting for the day when we reject socialism, communism and all other varieties of collectivism; when [we] realize that a security blanket isn’t worth the surrender of our individual freedom.”
Forced to choose, Republicans make freedom their first priority. Forced to choose, Liberals make risk reduction their first priority. A Republican administration will not ignore risk reduction and a Democratic administration will not ignore freedom, but when the chips are down they will choose risk reduction every time. This should be a very easy way to understand whether you should naturally be a Democrat or Republican.
The freedom vs. risk management issue is closely related to the paternalism vs. individualism issue but it’s different. They do share a root cause, which is that Republicans look at society as a collection of individuals (or at most a collection of families) and think about policies in terms of how they impact the individual life whereas Democrats look at society as a single mass or as a collection of large groups -- races and classes or, more broadly, oppressed vs. oppressors. They abstract away the impact of policies on individuals and focus analyze the impact of societal change in terms of the mass, collective impact. If aggregate utility is increased by a given policy, Democrats will favor it even if it reduces freedoms for individuals.
The Republican view is better because we all live lives as individuals, not as some sort of collective mass, and because giving up freedom is a slippery slope. You can only give it up once.
Specific examples in life --
Taxes. Retaining and controlling the money you earn is an important freedom. It allows you to express your preferences in your life and determine your own fate.
Safety regulation. Republicans want you to do what you want unless it really imperils society. It’s your life and you are a grown up. Democrats want you to trust him or her with your decisions; they will make great decisions for the betterment of everyone. Would you like to have a wood burning fire in your home? Well that’s too bad. Would you like to smoke a cigarette in your home? Too bad. Would you occasionally like to be able to ride your motorcycle -- acknowledging that you are taking risks -- without your helmet? Well that is too bad.
Other regulation. Another example involves regulations designed to control you for your own good. Have you ever had a politician determine that all new houses in a neighborhood have to have large front porches because they believe it will make everyone chat more? That person, I guarantee, was a Liberal Democrat. Does it matter if some people don’t want large front porches? Well, too bad for them.
When you embrace liberalism you trade your freedom for whatever security society can give you. You accept a child-like state. Republicans are not inclined to do so.
None of the founders would understand the degree of regulation we have today.
"They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it." --Thomas Jefferson
No comments:
Post a Comment