It's fix time for political junkies. Yes, I'm a political junkie. I admit it. Have been since at least 1975, when I began studying political science as a college freshman. With the Democrat National Convention underway, it's hard for me to think or write about anything else. Thank goodness the Tour de France is over and the Olympic Games have yet to begin; otherwise, I'd have a two-track mind.
Does it seem to you as though liberals feel entitled to govern? It does to me. This sense of entitlement has two sources. First, liberals think they're more intelligent than conservatives. Do you want to be governed by a smart crowd or a dumb crowd? Second, liberals think they're better (specifically, more compassionate) than conservatives. Governance, they suggest, is a matter of having sympathy for the disadvantaged. It's about having your heart in the right place. Liberals loved it when Bill Clinton said he felt his interlocutors' pain. It struck just the right note with them.
Both liberal beliefs are false. I've addressed the first of them—about alleged conservative stupidity—in a Tech Central Station column. See here. With regard to the second, I can only point to the law of unintended consequences. Most liberals I know, and I know quite a few of them, having been one, are well-meaning and admirably motivated. They sincerely believe that their policy prescriptions, if implemented, will make the world a better place for all concerned. If only those dastardly conservatives would get out of the way, they seem to say, we would have heaven on earth.
But intentions are not outcomes. Most liberal programs have had bad outcomes, even by liberal standards. Programs designed to end poverty, for example, have entrenched it—and in the process created a class of bureaucrats who have a vested interest in continuing the very programs that have failed. Programs designed to create opportunities for African-Americans have generated resentment among whites and an insidious assumption that any African-American who "makes it" is unqualified. Imagine the effect this has on the self-respect of African-Americans. If you deprive a person of self-respect, you take away the most important thing he or she has.
Liberals think that the means to world peace is negotiation (conciliation, compromise). No conservative opposes world peace. But not all conflicts are resolvable through negotiation, for that requires rational, self-interested agents. Our enemies today—radical Muslims—are irrational, at least by Western standards. They value destruction of their enemies more than their own lives or the lives of their loved ones. How do you negotiate with someone who is suicidal? How do you negotiate with someone who wants your death more than anything else? You have no leverage. The only way to deal with implacable, irrational enemies is through force. Conservatives, to their credit, understand this. Liberals do not.
When you think about it, it's ironic that liberals believe they're more intelligent than conservatives, because an intelligent person tempers idealism with reality. Liberals conveniently ignore certain unpleasant realities, such as the effect redistributive policies have on incentive. The more people are taxed, the less incentive they have to work or invest. Liberals think that if we sit down nicely with our enemies, we can bring them around. This may work with some enemies, but not all. In their zeal to ensure that everyone has a decent minimum of health care and other necessities, liberals ignore self-respect, self-esteem, and personal responsibility. When is the last time you heard a liberal talk about such things, much less emphasize them? And yet, aren't they crucially important? Shouldn't every policy take them into account?
It's no accident that liberals are called do-gooders. They mean well, but they usually end up making things worse. Their hearts bleed for the disadvantaged, but, by helping them, liberals create unhealthy dependencies, disincentives, and dysfunctions that end up harming the very people and communities they intend to help. It's tempting to conclude that liberals are stupid, but I think it's more complicated than that. They're impatient. They want results now, not later. They're shallow. They view humans as sentient beings, not as rational, autonomous agents. They're impetuous. They don't think through the implications of their policies.
With all due respect to my liberal friends, these are not the traits of the wise. They are the traits of children. Not only are liberals not entitled to govern; they don't deserve to govern. They need to grow up, develop a more holistic view of the person, develop a more realistic view of human nature, and cultivate a sense of patience. They need to stop patting themselves on the back for being benevolent, compassionate, caring, and sympathetic. Benevolence is neither necessary nor sufficient for acting rightly. Caring, far from being a synonym for justice, is often an impediment to it. It's not for nothing that we say that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Liberals prove it every day.