Three years have passed since our last presidential contest, and the recession endures. In 2008, our economic crises took then-candidate Barack Obama’s electoral victory from likely to inevitable. This year, economic malaise continues to define our politics, as Republican candidates fight for the right to represent their party next time.
Given the economic context, it’s not surprising that this contest has, like most Republican battles these last years, become a clash over conservative credentials.
It’s a good time to inspect the philosophy. These last few years have been defined by risk, loss and failure, prompting Republican discussions about self-reliance and responsibility.
Our governments are getting poorer, and most of our Republican officials think they should get cheaper too. The conservative consensus has so far demanded service cuts, with little fundraising, to balance budgets.
These decisions rarely come without great consequence; our most expensive public programs serve the elderly and poor, who sometimes suffer greatly when those programs disappear. For conservatives who’ve never favored such big spending in the first place, this recession is a great reason stop.
In its most basic form, there’s nothing in conservatism that says we must spend money on the poor. It’s a philosophy of little governments, and most articulations of conservative social policy place autonomy before community.
So as this country’s gotten leaner, it has gotten more conservative as well. We’ve slowed down those big spending projects that small governments could never have begun. Internationally we have stepped back foreign aid, and domestically, we’ve slashed at social spending and begun to take a hard look at “entitlements.”
For some conservatives, these moves present no problem.
But for the Christian conservative, these should be troubling developments, to say the least. Because the Christian conservative must serve two masters.
As Christians, we are called upon to care about the poor, and work to help them. Unlike a dedicated liberal, the principled conservative can’t delegate this duty to his government.
He says the government can’t feed the hungry, and it shouldn’t heal the sick and that’s OK. As long as he picks up the slack himself.
Unfortunately, that isn’t the direction we are moving. As light wallets make us naturally self-centered, we find principles to back those feelings up.
We’ve found those principles in moral hazard, or our national tradition of strong personal ambition. But the Bible is quite clear on our imperative to do good work, in service of the poor who we will always have here with us.
We can “teach the poor to fish” with tough love and a positive example. That’s an easy pill to swallow since it’s just what we’re inclined to do already.
But right now, more than ever, we need action for the poor and not ourselves. Direct action to alleviate real suffering, regardless of its moral cause.
Necessities like food and health care have been paid out publicly for many years. As conservatives, we can argue to defund them; but as Christians, it becomes our job to see they’re still provided.
Reach the columnist at john.a.gaylord@asu.edu
Click here to subscribe to the daily State Press newsletter.
