by Esteban Camacho

What is Conservatism? Does it have to do with party alignments? Is it a problem? Why do so many people speak lowly of it? Who are Conservatives? These are not questions that people ask themselves, they are questions that people blindly answer. Followers of other ideologies truly pretend to grasp what conservatism is all about, even though the education is dismal on the subject.

In this age of what seems to be infinitely growing liberalism (although it truly is not), those questions need to be answered in a simple manner. A manner which the independent mind can understand, and most importantly, in a manner that can bring the ideology back to the place it once was.

I began to get involved with politics in high school, to be more specific, the John Kerry/George W. Bush election. Our high school government instructors always had the news on, teaching us about the process of debate and voting. I came to understand much about each party by simply listening to each presidential hopeful. In fact, by the end of the election, I considered myself a Republican, even though I was not of age to vote. Yes, I was a Republican before I was a conservative. This can easily be explained in later sections.

When I reached my collegiate studies, I was bombarder with what seemed to be stupidity, although the formal term for it would be liberalism. This is what I though. I attempted to put myself in their shoes and hope to understand their way of thinking, but unfortunately, I could not. The only thing I seemed to noticed is that everyone of their positions was based on some kind of emotional input or output.

My first year of college is when I officially declared myself a Conservative Republican, and as a matter of fact, it was in direct response to the lack of logical thinking that I thought (and think) my fellow liberals had. There was a Congressional election that year (2006), but once again, I was too young to vote! It was not until December of that year that I turned 18 and rushed on to the local government branches to obtain my right to vote.
As I kept on through college as a Music Performance major, I realized that I was surrounded by a very liberal bunch.

In fact, I knew of three people in the immediate music center that shared my views, although i was not very popular, mind that this number is out of hundreds! I began to take some government courses, and I found out that I truly enjoyed them. In fact, my own major seemed almost useless to me. After what seemed like a waste of two years of my life, I finally decided to change my major to the study of Government.

In this book, I will provide examples as to why conservatism works, why we need a new revolution, and why it is important that conservative values never die. I will clearly speak about what the basics and values of conservatism are, and I will mention how conservative principles are applied to several issues. Also, I will underline why conservative issues are considered conservative.

When I was in my last day of my American Government course, the instructor mentioned words that I will never forget. I hope that this book will agree with his words, and will shed light on others as to why those words are true. He said to the class: “EVERY DECISION YOU MAKE IS POLITICAL.”

Conservatism can be defined in several different ways, however, there is a common placement of policy and issues that every conservative will have in common. I am not speaking about hair color, or style of dress, but instead, I speak of basic belief systems that are seen in a common conservative’s everyday life. There are several things we can look at to define our views as conservative, and these begin at the home. as I stated in the preface, every decision you make is political. The way the life of an individual is shaped has much to do with whether or not one will be conservative, however, I will focus only on what conservatism’s qualities are and how one can look at it, and recognize it.

These are the four things I believe every conservative believes in:

Conservatism can be defined in several different ways, however, there is a common placement of policy and issues that every conservative will have in common. I am not speaking about hair color, or style of dress, but instead, I speak of basic belief systems that are seen in a common conservative’s everyday life. There are several things we can look at to define our views as conservative, and these begin at the home. as I stated in the preface, every decision you make is political. The way the life of an individual is shaped has much to do with whether or not one will be conservative, however, I will focus only on what conservatism’s qualities are and how one can look at it, and recognize it.

These are the four things I believe every conservative believes in:

Pride and Respect for the Constitution
Limited Government
Individual Responsibility
Individual Liberties

These four basic things can be recognized in ever truly conservative value. These values are what makes the difference between a conservative and the rest of what I like to call “the masses.” I use this term because it seems as if many individuals are merely following a trend of liberalism because someone else is.

Also, it is important to note that while conservatism has its strongholds, liberalism will always be much easier to spread. This is because of their emotive use. Conservatism is not an ideology of emotion, it is not one of feelings, or irrational thought. Liberalism, on the other hand, is an ideology that revolves much around emotion. This can easily be seen in every one of their issue stances, and I will go across several issues on the basis of conservative vs. liberal in later chapters.

First, we can speak of pride and respect for the Constitution. Without this, the other basic three values would not be important or relevant. The Constitution is what gives us, The American people, an exceptional value. The Constitution guarantees limited government, which can then lead to individual liberties, and without individual liberties, individual responsibility will not need to occur to come of aid to the society. Pride and respect for the Constitution is simple: uphold the constitution, make sure the government does not abuse its power, and use the liberties given by the constitution consistently. Conservatives are thankful for this great document.

I recognize it as the single greatest government document ever written in human history. We need to be thankful for it, as Americans, because it is the sole reason we get to enjoy common freedoms like speech, the right to bear arms, speedy trials, etc. The Constitution should not be taken for granted, and every conservative in America will have a proud representation of the Constitution.

To summarize:

the Constitution of the United States is NOT a regulation on the people, it is a regulation on GOVERNMENT. Many, many Americans fail to understand this.

The Constitution does not say “the government’s power to take away arms shall not be infringed,” but instead it reads “the right of the PEOPLE… to bear arms shall not be infringed.”

Beginning with the preamble, the Constitution has many rights and liberties that can be taken for granted. Most of these rights are in the first ten amendments, or as most like to call it: the Bill of Rights. I should note that this “Bill of Rights” should be nationally known as the “Bill of Rights and Responsibilities.” Every conservative also has this in common. They are able to know what is a right, Constitutionally, and how to translate it into a responsibility. For example, the right t bear arms. This will be a right given to you by the Constitution, however, if it is used in an incorrect manner, for example, to murder, the right should be taken away from the individual. Same goes with freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the rest of the delegated rights to the people.

It is extremely important to understand that individuals are the ones who make decisions. The idea is to punish the individual by taking away their rights, not to punish the entire American society for the bad decisions of few. The second amendment is one that is a prime example of how a right and responsibility can be used for bad purpose. This then turns into a battle of the ideologies when it has to do with gun control. The left side of the spectrum often complains that guns “kill people.” They continuously seek to have stricter regulations (a word that i detest) on our second amendment rights. Conservatism would see this as an invasion to our Constitutional rights, and would of course, fight back.

One very common idea of conservatism is that the Constitution is not out-dated. Conservatives believe in the powers of the Constitution and believe that it must be kept as it is, with little to no change. Other ideologies do not embrace the Constitution in such way, instead, it is called an out-dated document, that needs to be changed because times, technology, and ways of life have changed. There are many arguments to this. One of mine is simply that times have not, and will not, change.

I mean this is the ways of freedom and the search for it. The Native Americans felt invaded by “the white folk,” and they wished freedom from them. In 1620, the Pilgrims sought freedom from the Catholic church, among many other things. In 1776, nearly 200 years later, freedom was still being sought after by our own Americans. In the 20th century, people from all over the world came to the United States to seek more personal opportunity and freedom. These are very few examples of how freedom will always be sought for. The Constitution of the United States granted the American people freedoms that the people of other countries wish they had. Until the world stops searching for freedom, the Constitution will be the most important government document in this country, and it should not be abolished.

As a last thought, we must be thankful for this government’s structure. A system of checks and balances which includes the people in it. A system created with power spread and equal, and where the people do make a difference. Also, we must be thankful that our system of government, created by the Constitution, is inefficient. Yes, inefficient is the correct term. In my personal studies of the Constitution, I have found that government is meant to be as inefficient as possible. This has come in “handy” in a variety of ways. First, it is important to mention the number of changes to the Constitution throughout the last 200 years.

The bill of rights were ratified in 1791, completing the Constitution. Lets measure from this time on. Our constitution has only had 17 changes from 1791, until now. That is an extremely impressive record, noting that some other countries, for example France, happen to change their Constitution nearly twice a century. I don’t mean minor changes, I mean their entire document of law. It would be the equivalent of our change from the Articles of confederation to the Constitution of the United States happening twice every 100 years. Second, we can speak of how long it takes for a simple bill to turn into a law.

The process is long, complex, and has many roads that must be taken. The system is so inefficient that when a bill has gone through committees, gone through both floors, subcommittees, taken several votes, and even accepted by Congress, the President only needs a veto to “kill” the bill. A process that took months can be destroyed in one day. Of course, we can expand that inefficiency by noting that Congress can override that same veto with a 2/3 vote of both houses of Congress, however, the process must begin again.

The second basic point of Conservatism is the wish for limited government. Of course, this country could not establish the base of a limited government without the Constitution. Conservatism is an ideology which strongly believes in limited government and the right of the people to debate and overthrow that government if it becomes necessary. I will continuously point to the second amendment for it’s many uses in political examples.

The second amendment “…right to bear arms shall not be infringed…” is an example of how the framers of the Constitution wanted to people to be in charge of government. Persons who are not conservative do not fully grasp the importance of such an amendment. The point was not “just” to allow citizens to own and keep weapons.

The purpose of the amendment was to protect the American people from oversized government. If the government so wishes to turn its military force against us, the people, we shall be armed with our militia and will be able to fight back. Of course, the government’s use of the military against its people is also heavily regulated by our model of government because the people make up our military, this was also not a coincidence.

The true conservative ideology believes in less government, for everyone. This is where I, and other that consider themselves conservative will vary. In the next chapters, I will cover some issues that not all conservatives have in common, and this will be part of an example of how party plays important roles in the decisions of an ideology by the people.

However, in order to expand on the idea of limited government, we must examine certain characteristics of limited and growing governments.

The most obvious characteristic of a growing government is increased spending.

Obviously, if the government is increasing spending it means two things: 1. The government is taking away from someone or something and 2. The government is providing for someone or something. The first point might be questionable, however, it is common process that in order for the government to give, it must first take something away.

Lets take as an example welfare programs, which are in the most part opposed by conservative minds. Welfare programs provide money, goods, and services to people in need (this can be very debatable, since need can be an opinion). These services require much money to fund.

This money is taken out of the private sector, which includes businesses and individuals, as well as others. It is safe to mention that not 100% of tax payers are receiving welfare, yet the money is being taken from 100% of taxpayers.

This is in fact a government growth program for the simple reason that it makes people depend on the government for simple assistance. Also, if these programs shall grow in the future, it will increase government power because of methods of taxation and revenue.

On top of this, the people that are receiving the welfare are more likely to vote for the platform that supported them on the issue of welfare. This becomes a cycle in which government increases in power. Conservatism chooses its stances mainly from this field alone: does it increase government power? This is a lot of the reason why true conservatives do not support drastic spending, such as the stimulus packages that we saw in 2008 and 2009.

Limited government CAN be defined. As a matter of fact, strict constructionists define limited government as when government only uses its delegated powers, and no excessive use of elasticity. Our current government happens to use the elastic clause much too often as it seeks to grow in power. Government uses the excuse of “necessary and proper” to accomplish many things.

Unfortunately, the American people, myself included, let the government get away with such acts. Conservatism will usually fight these government growths in simple manners. First, one can point to the Constitution, such as the Supreme Court does, in the decisions of government. Also, if the Supreme court fails to have a system of proper checks, the people have a direct say in it by their votes, trusting, of course, that the people are educated enough about the subject to understand the effects of that particular decision, whatever it may be. Although many Americans choose not to be educated in this manner, there is ALWAYS the group that is, and the group that will fight back.

Limited government, as mentioned earlier, is defined by me and many constructionists, as when government makes policy based on constitutional powers that it is granted, and nothing more. This is actually a lot more power than other ideologies believe. The government can safely operate and provide for the people of this country using only delegated powers.

The next point to focus on would be individual responsibility. Again, I cannot stress enough the order in which these are put. The Constitution is the law of the land, and without the Constitution, there is no system of a limited government, and without a limited government entity and power, we have little individuality. Slowly, the power of the individual has been drifting away. The pace at which this is occurring has been speeding throughout the last few decades.

Conservatism values the power of the individual. In fact, conservatism IS the belief that the government is only there to provide resources necessary for the individual to become successful and solve problems. This is in contrast to other ideologies, which the government is there to make sure no one is in need. We can go through the basics of some issues now, as they pertain to individual responsibility.

Let’s mention the idea of poverty vs. riches. As most Americans know, the conservative ideologies and platforms usually attempt to stall any major welfare reforms, which of course, tend to benefit the lower classes. A common misconception is that the conservative platform works for the rich. This idea has often been translated into the rich Republican blame game. The truth of the matter is that the conservative ideology wishes to teach how to survive rather than to allow to survive. The difference is obvious. There is a famous saying that explains this rather clearly:

“Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man how to fish, feed him for a lifetime.”

This is in the very basics of personal responsibility. A conservative will usually attempt to stall a major welfare reform for this exact reason. Conservatives believe, as I do, that welfare is the giver, while other policies can be enacted to be the teacher. This is an excellent example of why conservatives believe that welfare-like programs should be left to charities and private organizations.
Another issue is the abuse of welfare programs. We can logically conclude that not 100% of welfare receivers actually need the welfare aid. The choice comes down to the individual, and whether or not that individual is willing to sacrifice enough to be successful.

Some would say that this is an unfair process, and the truth is that it is in fact not fair. However, in order to have a fair government system, we must completely rid ourselves of the basis of individuality, and therefore sacrifice many freedoms that we would otherwise be able to have. “Life is not fair” is quite a simple, but accurate saying. What our system of society, government, economics, and rights guarantee is equal opportunity, NOT to be confused with equality.

Simply put, individual responsibility is a power only delegated to the individual. The ability to make sound decisions, and not blame society for the problems of a few. I name it a power because to involve individual responsibility into everyday life brings fast results. Lets take for example the economic crisis that began in 2008. This crisis was not only a fault of government, but it was also a fault of the individual. If the individual could not comfortably afford something, then it should not be bought. Most people of different ideologies that do not involve individual responsibility will blame banks and corporations. This is because they blame the provider.

For every economic problem there is the provider and the consumer. Those that provide make the goods, whatever they may be, available to the consumer, who in turn trades something for that good (usually money). With this in mind, we can evolve into many different issues. Pornography, credit card debts, interest rates; these are all the decisions of the consumer; the provider merely allows them to exist. The ideologies that blame the providers too much have little sense of individual responsibility.

With the logic of provider and consumer, we can ask ourselves a very logical question if we indeed believe in a god: “God allowed marijuana, cocaine, heroin, and other malicious substances to exist (provider), will we blame god for marijuana, cocaine, or heroin addictions?” Answers, of course, vary; mine will be a solid ‘no.’ However, this is a logical argument to what I call the corporate blame game.

As a conservative, I put the most blame on the individual. This my most despised area of other ideologies, is their notion of personal responsibility. The corporate blame game occurs, and this causes regulation in the area that this country is designed to have the most freedom in: the economic markets.

The economy, being such a complex topic, will be covered in later chapters. Individual responsibility is in my opinion how most ideologies will be defined. This alone will determine policy, outcomes, and regulations that government will create. This is the defining attribute because individuals make up the whole, and if the individuals are not personally responsible, then it is impossible for the whole to be responsible. This could theoretically be “fixed” with a system of social analysis. By this I mean several leftist systems such as socialism or communism, which stress the importance of equality, again, not to be confused with equal opportunity.

Finally, we can define and understand conservatism in the way it looks at individual liberties. This has many ties to the constitution, however, I decided to include this in addition after further speculation.

Individual liberties are more than just what is mentioned word by word in the Constitution. I am not speaking of implied rights, but instead, interpreting what the words on the Constitution really mean. Questions one would ask would be:

“What did the founding fathers intend?”
“What rights are enveloped in the Constitutional rights?”
“What can the government do as way of violating those rights?”

These are a bit more specific than when just looking at the Constitution. For example, if a foreigner were to read the Constitution word by word, and memorize it, the reader would not have a deep understanding of what the Constitution is really meant to be used for.

For one, the reader would not fully understand that the Constitution is not a law on the people. An example would be the 16th amendment. This is a dramatic change of language from that of the prior amendments, especially the Bill of Rights. When reading, it is clear that the Bill of Rights, similar to the Constitution, controls government power. However, when we read the 16th:

“The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment throughout the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

The language could not be more clear; it is an amendment drastically growing government power. This is the opposite of what the Constitution is meant to do. Often times, government makes further laws regulating the people for many things. Of course, a vast majority of these are not Constitutional amendments, since they require no change of the Constitution. However, advantage is being taken by the government by using elasticity, as I have mentioned before, in many policy making processes.

The issue with elAsticity, is that it has the capacity to completely overturn the COnstitution, and yet, the system of checks and balances cannot apply, since that system was solely created to protect the words of the Constitution. Occasionally, a Supreme Court justice will come forward and interpret the Constitution the correct way, and therefore not allow that elasticity to occur. Take for example the PATRIOT Act during the Bush era. This act had terms that violated privacy, invaded individual liberties, and in my opinion, had no respect for the Constitution.
This is a useful example because many “conservatives” happened to agree with the PATRIOT Act.

This, however, was most likely due to party loyalty than it was the actual issues. Even big conservative voices like Rush Limbaugh supported this act, even if the next day, they will again advocate limited government. This is one of the very few flaws of Rush Limbaugh and others like him.

However, it is important for me to note in this writing that I am a full supporter of Limbaugh and what he spreads, after all, no two conservatives will be the exact same. This act used elasticity to a point that made me quite uncomfortable. Knowing that when I use my telephone, a government machine or agent could be very easily listening to every word I say is quite disturbing.. The government was able to do this without the rule of it being unconstitutional because the Constitution does not speak of privacy, it speaks of owning private property, this meaning homes. However, this goes back to what was mentioned before about the interpretation of individual liberties. This would be one of the many.

Conservatism is an ideology that strongly favors individual liberties. This is very easily seen in all issues, as long as true conservatism is followed. As a full summary, conservatism is the belief that the people should be individually responsible to solve their own problems.

It is an ideology based on the responsibility of the individual as compared to the responsibility of government. While other ideologies, especially the liberal ideology, look to government to solve people’s problems and the ills and weaknesses of society, conservatism looks to the base (the people) to do this for themselves.

Conservatism stresses the importance of the Constitution and all of its delegated powers, and the ideology makes sure that individual responsibilities fall within the Constitution. Other ideologies, especially the liberal ideology, stress that the Constitution is outdated and must be changed in order to adapt to the 21st century society.

As I was ‘surfing’ the net, I came across a website that goes by the name of “Liberal Voices.” This group, as it seems, wrote a blog article about the differences between liberalism and conservatism. Of course, as I have mentioned before, this is a subject that most people would not understand. “Liberal Voices” claims that conservatism focuses on the ‘governing class.’

It claims that conservatives see this higher class as the “source of strength that sustains society.” Liberal voices continues to say that conservatism believes that that higher class has more “social equity than those with less property and its intellect gives it the responsibility to protect the equity.”

This completely disagrees with what conservatism truly is. This further proves that even groups that claim to know the definitions of conservatism truly do not.

The conservative platform does not ever give any one class, person, group, or system any special equity. this goes directly back to my 4th point. Every citizen of this country has the same amount of rights, and they all have equal opportunity under conservatism. This has been an extremely common misconception amongst liberals. The ridiculous and emotional claim that conservatives only care for the higher class is bogus, for lack of a better term. This capitalist system works as a cycle. The rich provide, the rest consume. Without either party involved, the cycle would collapse. Conservatives understand this process, and it is why, economically, individual responsibility matters so greatly. Liberal voices ends the point saying:

“Conservatives see the world through the eyes of fear while liberals see it with hope.”

If a scholar wrote this in a scientific analysis, I don’t quite know what the response would be, however, I know that it would be a negative one.

Conservatives see the world through pride, freedom, and with the fact that America is simply the best country on this planet. Conservatives show this by protecting the core values of our society, including the most important: individual responsibility. Conservatives see this country as one where a dream can be fulfilled, what we call the American dream. This dream can be accomplished by all, and conservatives are ready to accept that some have to work at it much harder and longer than others, however, the opportunity is still there. The liberal ideology believes that government is there to ensure that equality occurs, while conservatism believes that we all have equal opportunity. Which sounds more like fear to you?

Conservatives believe that government should have less impact in personal lives, in order to have our individual liberties to ourselves. Liberals believe more government is necessary in order to protect the masses from what they call ” the governing class.” What sounds more like fear?
Conservatism covers a consistent role in all issues from economics, to abortion, and back to markets. The idea to keep in mind is my third point: individual responsibility. This is by far the most important to have as a base, and it will easily explain why we conservatives believe as we do. Anytime a question arises like this:

“Why do most conservatives believe that?”

The first answer that should pop to the head should be:

“Individual responsibility.”

 

Esteban G. Camacho is a contributor to HipHopRepublican.com he was born in 1989 in Bayamon, Puerto Rico. There he lived in a lower class family with his single mother for 11 years before moving to the contiguous states. Esteban became involved with politics when he reached his senior year of high school. When he got to college, he immediately pursued further education in the fields of government and economics. A staunch conservative and an advocate of the free market economies of the world, Esteban spends his time researching political backgrounds, economic titles such as Wealth of Nations, and strengthening his conservative base. Esteban believes in personal responsibility, individual liberty, equal opportunity, and in the American dream. Among his favorite quotes is: “What would you attempt if you knew you could not fail?” Esteban resides in Las Cruces, New Mexico and is currently pursuing a degree in Political Science.

Esteban’s YouTube Video Page - http://www.youtube.com/user/ConservativeE

For a counter view - http://hiphoprepublican.com/general/2009/07/17/the-real-republicans-the-case-for-moderates-liberals-and-pragmatic-conservatives-in-our-party-part-6/