Archive for January, 2010

 Imagination is a wonderful and useful tool, or an awful and wicked weapon, depending upon how and why it is employed. Every act of every man, woman, boy or girl takes place first in the imagination. Sobering, wouldn’t you agree? I don’t believe we could “imagine” a more powerful and significant concept than imagination.

So how does imagination apply to the body politic? The answer is simple: imagination is a factory. Notice that it is not the raw materials but the place where these inputs are built into a product. Next we have to consider the process and it goes something like this. Observations about the current state of affairs are measured against the “way things ought to be.”

Stop right there, don’t gloss over that sentence!

Thoughtful observation yields empirical evidence, objective facts, if you will, most everyone agrees upon. But the word “ought” presents a serious problem, namely, inescapable subjectivity. Appeals to “the way things ought to be” necessarily demand an accepted standard. That’s precisely where it gets sticky, personal and political.

The standard of what ought to be can find origin in only one of two places. Either it is external transcending mankind and is objective, or it is man-made, synthesized and quite subjective. This presents special problems for the so called Liberal as they find themselves on the horns of a dilemma.

The mission and reason for existence of the Liberal is to “liberate” mankind from outside, transcendent values and behavioral standards. But then they must imagine a system which administers this absence of objective truth as, well, an objective truth. The horns of the dilemma are long and Liberal thinking is wholly skewered upon them. Let’s embark upon a thought experiment that will help our understanding.

Imagine a society where everyone does what is “good” (whatever that might mean) for their neighbor, where everyone willingly shares and everyone gives their best efforts regardless of who will benefit from the work. In short, imagine a complete reversal of the observably verifiable nature of mankind. Now imagine the best way to administer such a utopia and, voila, you arrive, more or less, at the core concepts of modern Liberalism. This is the “ought to be” in the Liberal imagination factory. The obvious fallacy is starting with a false view of mankind.

Imagine, instead, a society where we observe man’s natural tendency towards self-interest and then begin to devise a systemic solution that harnesses that selfishness to serve the desires of the society at large. Knowing that selfishness fully applies to those who govern or administer power is kept in check to avoid despotic tyranny. Placing power and faith in a system safe guards our freedom. This is the “ought to be” of the Conservative imagination factory.

To put it in other words and more succinctly, Liberals start with a fictitious view of mankind as an input in their factory. Conservatives begin with observable objective fact as a raw material for their factory.

Like it or not appeals to what “ought” to be imply a transcendent standard of “good.” The standard either comes from outside man, reflected in words like “…we hold these truths to be self-evident, that men are CREATED equal and are endowed by their CREATOR…” or the standard is synthesized by man, reflected in notions such as a “living constitution.” One is systemic and objective; the other is despotic, developed and applied subjectively.

What do you think?

Faith is an absolute requirement for those lacking omniscience. Everyone relies on things they can’t see and don’t fully understand.

Depriving individuals of their inalienable rights is slavery and tyranny, even if 51% vote for it!

Equality of outcomes is immoral. It is also quite impossible outside a completely totalitarian system.

Equality of opportunity is a God-given right the protection of which is a legitimate use of coercive police powers of government.

For a person to disagree with you does not automatically consign them to the “lunatic fringe.”

Classic literature became “classic” for a reason. Read it and discover why!

If you’re not reading Thomas Sowell that could be your problem.

If you’re not reading the Holy Bible that’s definitely your problem!

Rejecting a culture based on the character of what it produces is not bigotry. Accepting a culture in spite of what it produces is not virtuous.

Words and rhetoric can be used to communicate truth or falsehood but only truth can be consistently demonstrated.

To everyone who has supported me through this endeavor, to Bryan Calvert my blogging partner, and to my beautiful wife Renae (shameless plug for her blog), I say thank you!  I wish you all love, happiness, and health in this new year.

May God bless each of you.

With the words of the great James Madison, we look forward to November.

What is to be the consequence, in case the Congress shall misconstrue this part [the necessary and proper clause] of the Constitution and exercise powers not warranted by its true meaning, I answer the same as if they should misconstrue or enlarge any other power vested in them…the success of the usurpation will depend on the executive and judiciary departments, which are to expound and give effect to the legislative acts; and in a last resort a remedy must be obtained from the people, who can by the elections of more faithful representatives, annul the acts of the usurpers. – Federalist No. 44, January 25, 1788

Photo credit: Selva Ganapathy