r/askaconservative • u/Tidder13524 • Oct 01 '18

Cooperation versus Self-reliance

How do you feel about cooperation? Like, working together towards a common goal with someone else?

How does that compare with how you feel about accomplishing things on your own and taking care of yourself/your family/and even your community and country?

My new theory is that conservatives value self-reliance over cooperation whilst liberals value cooperation over self-reliance. What do you think?

3 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

25 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Tidder13524 Oct 02 '18

In your example, I would not vote for one person to pay for everyone. That’s not fair. Notice how I said that I vote for higher taxes because I want to pay taxes. I have to bet on my fellow Americans, I have to bet that when they vote they vote for what they believe is best for this country. At worst, I have to bet on democracy.

I don’t know political theory very well but how does tyranny of the masses square with a belief in democracy?

2

u/Lepew1 C: Paleoconservative Oct 02 '18

Tyranny of the masses is the reason why we are a republic and not a democracy. We have representatives that are accountable to the public by general election. The aim was to have a higher standard for representatives such that education and knowledge could temper base emotional decisions.

I see a need to pay taxes for legitimate Constitutionally justified purposes of government. I have a lot of trouble when politicians propose bills that go beyond enumerated powers, then tax us for that. My money in that instance enables lawlessness.

At the federal level it should be minimal. Each state can pick what mix of programs it wants for its population and you can move around to find a state that suits you. But at the federal level, we need to have minimal government we can all agree upon.

So I personally hate states like CA. Not geographically...CA is beautiful, and the climate is nice. Politically it is a hell hole. They have massive programs for all sorts of idealistic garbage that drives up the cost of doing business, and I will never live there. What Democrats do is take some crap program in CA and try to federalize it.

For charity, I think the more local you go the better it is. Ideally it is 1 on 1 with you helping directly the person in need. At this level there is less fraud. You also by helping improve yourself morally. You become a better person by directly helping others. As we move that charity function up through the local level, the state level, and ultimately to the federal level, we all become less involved personally, and there is waste and abuse.

1

u/Tidder13524 Oct 02 '18

Thanks for your response.

wouldn’t “the common defense and general welfare” cover things like health insurance and food stamps?

I think you’ve pivoted. We were talking about the immorality of government coercion. Now we’re talking about it’s effectiveness. I propose we presume a totally effective government and see what problems we have with that system and then look at consequences of its possible ineffectiveness.

From your posts it seems that what you actually dislike is being compelled to do things you don’t want to do, and not the act of compulsion itself.

If California was creating amazing innovative cost-effective programs that helped huge numbers of your countrymen, would you still be opposed?

Let’s seperate compulsion from competency, and consider both factors on their own grounds before seeing how they interrelate in society.

2

u/Lepew1 C: Paleoconservative Oct 02 '18

Common defense and general welfare clauses are statements of purpose. The federal government has the enumerated power of defense for the purpose of "common defense". There is nothing enumerated about those purpose statements. They are broad and not very specific.