By Bruce Bialosky
Monday, September 03, 2012
With the election coming up, many people believe that the
stakes for our country are as big as they have ever been. A large number of
Americans believe that the first term of the Obama Administration has ushered
in a new era of expansionist government, resulting in what Friedrich A. Hayek
wrote about in The Road to Serfdom. Some wish to reverse this reckless
expansion, and thus Arthur C. Brooks has written The Road to Freedom.
How did a man who aspired to be a professional French
horn player come to write a book like this? Not very easily, as it turns out.
After abandoning his musical ambitions, he began a career generally considered
unlikely to launch an anti-left persona – he became an academic. He reached
national attention with the 2006 publication of Who Really Cares: The
Surprising Truth about Compassionate Conservatism, which argued that
conservatives are really the compassionate individuals that liberals only claim
to be. In 2008, Brooks became president of the American Enterprise Institute, a
position that has given him a major megaphone with which to communicate his
views.
The Road to Freedom is a succinct explanation of how
Americans favoring an opportunity society can regain power in 2012. Brooks told
me that conservatives have the correct message, but they are not communicating
it in the best manner. Consequently, they often lose the battle because they
frame their arguments poorly, resulting in an ineffective case for their views.
He believes that conservatives need to focus on the message of a free society,
and must express in clear, concise language (as he does in his book) that
“freedom is not provided by governmental programs.”
If there is an argument to be made, the next question is
who has been the best at conveying that argument? Brooks first mentions William
F. Buckley, who in his opinion started the free enterprise discussion, and then
shifts to Barry Goldwater and Friedrich Hayek. When asked who is presently best
at arguing for economic liberty, Brooks answered without hesitation –
Congressman Paul Ryan. As Brooks says “He has a visionary point of view.”
Brooks cites the welfare reform movement of the 1990’s as
an example of a victory for clarity of the argument. A Democratic president
signed the reform which has had a significant and lasting effect on government
dependency.
As an example of what we must now argue against on moral
grounds, Brooks proposes that it is wrong to deficit spend. He also suggests
that we should make the moral case against crony capitalism.
Then he proposes something refreshing. He states that
conservatives have abdicated the issue of fairness to the liberals. With
President Obama leading the way, liberals constantly use the notion of
“fairness” to argue for higher taxes on our most productive citizens. Obama
knows that he can’t argue the facts, since high-earning individuals already pay
a disproportionate share of their income, along with much of the overall tax
burden. Brooks, however, maintains that the issue of fairness really belongs to
conservatives, pointing out that while only 11% of Americans favor
redistribution, 89% defend a meritocracy. He claims that if the left is winning
the fairness argument, it’s because the right isn’t in the game.
Seeing that this was such an effective argument, I
thought that I would try it out. I recently met with Todd Zink, a Republican
candidate for the California State Senate. Zink, who was a Lt. Colonel in the
United States Marines, is a political novice, and when I suggested that he
should use the fairness argument in his campaign, his eyes lit up. I suggested
he should say that it is unfair for Democrats to raise taxes while ordinary
Californians are working hard and struggling to make ends meet. It is unfair
for public employees to have cushy pensions after 20 or 25 years while the
ordinary taxpayer has to work for 40 years for a far more meager retirement.
It’s not fair that 47% of Americans pay no federal income taxes at all. And it’s
not fair to urban black parents for their children to be stuck in poorly
performing schools without the choice of going elsewhere. Ultimately it is how
you frame the issue, and Brooks is correct.
Brooks’ book is filled with great ideas to help
conservatives frame the debate and win the day. In the competitive world of
politics, we all need to improve our delivery, and Dr. Brooks with his book is
here to help.
No comments:
Post a Comment