As seen in Canada Free Press.
Conservatism owns Populism. Why not proclaim it?
Conservative principles and means are superior to all other means—to achieving Populist ends. Why don’t we announce this on every network, at every appearance, at every opportunity, on all channels, and on a daily basis?
5,000 years of human history attests to Conservatism’s superior means for achieving Populist ends. No other philosophy, program, plan, system—nothing—serves the ends of Populism more than Conservatism’s protection of free people and free markets. Moreover, America’s particular history demonstrates what happens—for everyone—when individual rights and property rights are protected. More wealth is produced more rapidly than with any other system—and again—to the benefit of everyone in society, including the “little guy” and even the street bum. What could be more Populist than greater bounty for everyone?
For example, consider the least of the least, a starving skid row bum in the alley, too impaired to travel to the soup kitchen or homeless shelter. Imagine for the sake of argument this bum deserves to be where he is—he is a sexual predator, murderer, whatever. We find him in the back alley, shivering under cardboard, hypothermic in early winter. A passerby calls 911; EMT’s are dispatched, arrive quickly. The man is nearly comatose, close to death. EMT’s begin lifesaving procedures. At the hospital the man is admitted and treated aggressively. The doctors notice evidence of pneumonia; the lab determines his infection is antibiotic-resistant; a very high-priced antibiotic is required. It is administered. The hospital social worker arranges for life-sustaining services in the community. Certainly, there is no hospital bill—or, rather, the $20,000.00 cost of his treatment is “written off.” The hospital, its doctors, lab, and social work department, absorb the costs. They absorb the costs not because the administrators or doctors are particularly more humanitarian than any others, and not because the government “requires” they serve the man without recompense. Instead, to the largest extent, the hospital saves this man, attends to him, treats him and supports him, because it can; assuming of course the hospital lives within a vibrant economy made so by free people and free markets. Notably, because we still—for now – live in a bountiful society, variations of this particular example are played out most every day in most every hospital in the U.S.—even in the absence of the ACA.
The material bounty of a free economy, for everyone, makes expensive antibiotics, expensive procedures, IV’s, emergency care, expensive doctors, nurses and social workers, available to the most destitute among us. If the material bounty weren’t there, if there were no surplus products or manpower available—in the absence of free people and free markets – the man in our example might have died in the late-arriving ambulance or on a gurney in the ER waiting to be seen. If seen at all, the struggling lab might have missed the necessity for a high-priced antibiotic, or the high-priced antibiotic might not be available. Hard to believe? Visit Great Britain.
Take a moment. Stop and think—is there really anyLiberal/Progressive nostrum proven to serve everyone more than Conservatism? None. Never. Instead, Liberals preach “benefit for all” predicated on division, and mired in jealousy, greed, and entitlement. Inevitably, Liberal solutions are a natural consequence of Liberalism’s presumption of the zero-sum game. With only one pie of the same size to share, there must arise division and jealousy—a larger piece for one means a smaller piece for another. To be fair, then, external compulsion is required to prevent exploitation of some by others. Everyone is allowed the same – an identical slice of poverty. On the contrary, Conservative Populism preaches freedom, each individual working for his family’s gain, resulting in everyone’s gain; it preaches a pie that expands—everyone’s piece is larger.
Despite the logic and proven success of Conservatism’s larger pie (derided in the 1980’s as supply-side or “voodoo” economics), Conservatives won’t declare this fact, won’t articulate their ownership of Populism. Instead, Conservatives articulate Conservative principles as ends in themselves. And,mired in the truth of our principles we Conservatives fail to market the truth of our outcomes. And, if we do not labor to promote the truth of superior outcomes of our principles—who will?
Conservatism needs marketing and sales consultants—badly.
Conservatives also fail to make the sale because many possess only a meager faith in freedom’s bounty for all. Admittedly, it is hard to preach what one does not believe. We cannot, however, fault our brethren whose faith is weak. It is most often a result of the true and miraculous nature of Conservative Populism; free people and free markets providing bounty for everyone, is hard to believe—until one examines the logic and the evidence.
If only we will sell it, Conservatism can easily become the predominant philosophy for everyone in our society, andeveryone will benefit. Three things are required. First, we must acknowledge our sales and marketing techniques are remarkably ineffective—unconvincing at best, insulting at worst—and we must commit to curing this tragedy. Second, we must take ownership of the “bounty for everyone” portion of the Populist message—logic and history prove it is ours by right. We must declare this bounty for everyone is our unmitigated intention. Third, after taking ownership, we mustSELL IT, we must SELL our bounty for everyone message, and we must sell it AGGRESSIVELY. We must shout it from every rooftop, every day and every night, “Conservative means achieve Populist ends more effectively than any other means in the history of Man!” “And all shall have prizes!”
Without ownership of the Populist message, Conservatism’s free people and free markets will not succeed. Taking ownership of the Populist message, and SELLING IT, Conservatism cannot fail.