Kevin Drum thinks that Sully has shown himself to be simply a heartless conservative in his reaction to Hillary’s quote (blogged earlier today) about taxs, taking things away, and the “common good”:
he was annoyed because HC invoked the “common good.” This is apparently all it takes to drive some conservatives nuts these days.What a sad commentary. Of course the purpose of taxation is to provide for the common good and of course Hillary believes her agenda coincides with that common good. What else would she believe?
Apparently, though, a mere acknowledgment that she believes in advocating for the common good is anathema to Sullivan. But if that was really his gut reaction, what does he think we’re all here for?
What Kevin misses is that the objection that Sullivan is likely expressing, and no doubt one that most conservatives hold in common, is not the direct objection that government does things for the common good, it is the ideological arrogance suggested by Mrs. Clinton stating that she wants to “take things away” from citizens “on behalf of the common good” because the implication is that she knows better how to better promote the common good than do those who earned their own money (and other “things”).
There is a clear theoretical statement that undergirds Mrs. Clinton’s pronouncement: that the best way to promote the common good is for the government to confiscate wealth and redistribute it. It assumes that Mrs. Clinton and her compatriots in the Senate know what’s best for the country, and therefore believe they have the right to take from some citizens to promote that vision of the good.
The fundamental conservative revulsion at that statement in question comes from the idea that only right-thinking members of the state know what the “common good” is and, further, that only they can promote it–and can best do so with your stuff.
It is not, as Drum tries to intimate, that Sullivan (and by extension, conservatives) simply care not for the common good.
There are two additional points to be made here:
1) There is a legitimate theoretical position that the common good is better served when the population is more in charge of the wealth they earn. Further, one can argue that it is morally proper for one to keep the fruits of one’s own labors.
2) The most fundamental problem here is that there is profound disagreement on what defines the “common good.” To assume that one is personally imbued with the perfect definition of the “common good” is the apex of hubris, and typically leads not to any good, but rather to tyranny.
Update: Stephen Bainbridge reacts as well.
July 2nd, 2024 at 4:24 pm
I think the other distinction to be made here is that one of the chief things that makes one a D or an R today is one’s belief about which is more important to them (the common vs. the individual good), and government’s role in establishing the common good.
Hillary and a large number of the Dems today seem to believe that the common good is the only good. That, if one becomes wealthy, one should be penalized and criticized for obvious greed.
Of course, the flip side is that doing so undermines the very things that fuel economic growth and job creation in the first place. It is precisely this “greed” that causes the jobs to happen.
June 30th, 2024 at 3:11 pm
Beltway Traffic Jam
Fortunately, my commute merely has me briefly crossing Route 50, so I wasn’t delayed for an extra hour by bizarre police activity.The midweek linkfest: Dean Esmay explains how to get over like a fat rat. King of Fools likes the new $50s—an…
June 30th, 2024 at 4:59 pm
Common Good
What exactly is it? Is it rounding up all HIV+ people and dumping them in a large quarantine camp? After all, with nobody with HIV the disease can’t spread. If you don’t have it this is clearly a benefit to you. Or how about rounding up people who eat …
June 30th, 2024 at 5:05 pm
Common Good
What exactly is it? Is it rounding up all HIV+ people and dumping them in a large quarantine camp? After all, with nobody with HIV the disease can’t spread. If you don’t have it this is clearly a benefit to you. Or how about rounding up people who eat …
July 1st, 2024 at 10:11 pm
What is “The Common Good”?
Who gets to define it? Thanks to the lidless eye, I have been led to a series of blog entries which center around the notion of “the common good”, spawned by a recent Hillary Clinton speech to wealthy supporters:”Many of you are well enough off that …..
July 7th, 2024 at 7:43 am
On HIllary and the Common Good
I know I’m a bit late in dealing with this, but I’ve been stewing on it for about a week now, and I’m still having trouble seeing the point being made by the right about Hillary Clinton’s now-famous statement: “Many…