The Dillard Doctrine

Urban Conservative Commentary on Politics & Life

Question…and Answer

A friend of mine that I went to high school is a-as I think he’d put it-leftist. His political philosophy either borders on or crosses socialism, and we agree on very little. Yet his arguments are always rational, backed up by a lot of research, and for the most part free of any emotional attacks. Would that more of my liberal-minded friends would follow that example.

Anyway, he posed the following question on Facebook yesterday:

My conservative friends, I have a serious question for you. One thing I think we can agree on is that capitalism creates and sustains hierarchy (quintessentially, CEO vs. worker) as well as developing a permanent unemployment rate (capitalism cannot and does not sustain universal employment). Obviously, we cannot all be CEOs with those attendant advantages.  Given an idealized society, free of racial, gender, and other relevant biases, what, if anything, would you have society provide for those on the bottom of that hierarchy? In short, what would your sense of humanity require of society?

…and here’s the answer I gave him:

If you’re asking what society should give to individuals-and I’m equating “give” to your “provide”-the answer is simple: nothing beyond society’s own charity.

The Declaration of Independence tells us that we all have three rights from birth: the right to live, live freely, and pursue those things that make us both happy and successful. Those apply to the person at the top of the chain, as well as at the bottom, and were written free of any bias. In areas of our history, man has attempted to remove those rights from certain people-minorities, women, we know the list-and every time, history has reaffirmed that rights not given by man cannot be taken by him (due process excepted).
A capitalist society need not establish a hierarchy that pits the employer against the employee, nor need it create a permanent unemployed class. My understanding of capitalism is that it seeks to encourage and reward innovation and efficiency. That’s often found in large corporations, but it’s also found in people who see a void and can fill it with a product/service of their own making. No, we can’t all be CEOs and I think that a lot of people, when presented with all the issues that come with the salary, wouldn’t necessarily want to be a CEO. That role isn’t cut for everyone…and there’s some that, despite their talents, just don’t want it.

Society gives on its own. America’s private industries are one of the largest charity donor bases in the world…and that’s something that’s done without a government mandate. We as a people feel it’s the right thing to do, to help people maintain their rights as listed above. Is it always enough? Of course not. But when you demand that someone give of themselves what they were giving of their own free will, you remove the personal connection that makes the person want to give in the first place. If I replace “society” with “government,” then the role is to ensure, to the best of its ability, a relatively-level playing field with as few requirements as possible. Will the field ever truly be level? No, but government-and by extension, the people-are not the guarantors of success-the individual is.

What do you think?

HB2DF, Coby

Advertisements

Written by Coby Dillard

April 13, 2010 at 9:05 am

Posted in Uncategorized

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. “My conservative friends, I have a serious question for you. One thing I think we can agree on is that capitalism creates and sustains hierarchy (quintessentially, CEO vs. worker)”

    Capitalism is not unique in that it hierarchies. Every society be it communist socialists or capitalist will have those that work for or under others, and even those perceived as at the top, still work for some one else.

    “as well as developing a permanent unemployment rate (capitalism cannot and does not sustain universal employment).”

    Free market societies that protect an individuals right to life liberty and pursuit of happiness have the highest standers of living for all its people. In such societies, all responsibility rest on the individual to develop his talents and be productive members of society providing products and services others want. He makes his decisions on weather to tend his garden, repair his home, work self employed or seek employment with another. To acquire gain any other way is immoral.

    “Obviously, we cannot all be CEOs with those attendant advantages.”

    No but each and everyone of us can take ownership in himself (Individual INC) for his successes and failures.

    “Given an idealized society, free of racial, gender, and other relevant biases, what, if anything, would you have society provide for those on the bottom of that hierarchy?”

    I take exception to the several implied perceptions with the reference to hierarchy. I will reiterate: all systems will have those that work for others, furthermore those perceived as at the top, will work for some one else

    “In short, what would your sense of humanity require of society?”

    In its simplest terms what a liberty minded Conservative require of society:
    To protect each individuals right to his pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness, the product of which being his private property. On issues of federal governance among the several sovereign states, we require no more and demand no less. Protecting these rights involves a national defense to keep us safe from foreign governments, the states and local governments are largely charged with protecting individuals from denying another though force or fraud these very same rights. Furthermore society needs to fully recognize mans natural right to protect him and his.

    I furthermore will suggest that a society that protects equal rights is better then one seeking equal outcomes. Equal Rights and equal outcomes on the surface may seem unrelated, but a deeper examination reveals they are mutually exclusive. Equal rights ensures to each an opportunity to enjoy the fruits of his good choices, sacrifices, and hard work, or to suffer the consequences for lack thereof. Conversely ensuring equal outcomes destroys natural systems of rewards and consequences whereby society is improved, replacing it with destructive systems that punishes those virtues, rewarding poor choices and indolence.

    Keith Reynolds

    April 14, 2010 at 3:11 am


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: