The Moral Case for Conservatism

In 1964, an actor named Ronald Reagan stunned a Los Angeles crowd with a magnificent defense of human liberty, voluntary association, and American Exceptionalism. He loved America, unlike most of Hollywood’s elite today. Reagan grew up in the Midwest as a Democrat. He moved to Hollywood and became a conservative Republican. Why did he change?

As Reagan pointed out in his speech, the Democratic Party walked away from its roots in Jefferson, Jackson, and Cleveland. The party was moving “down the road in the image of the labor Socialist Party of England.” One does not have to be a declared “socialist” to believe that history can only move “forward.” Instead of directly imposing socialism on a people, their party believes in the benevolent State that promises extraordinary benefits and programs with no real costs, except money.

The progressive ideology claims government activism can only increase the freedoms enjoyed by our citizens. So, government activism becomes utilitarian, any mean is necessary to achieve the end of pure equality. Therefore, government activism can only be patriotic; individual accomplishment can only be greedy.  

We have an important choice this election. It is the same choice Reagan described to his Los Angeles audience:

“You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down—up man's old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.”  

In 1964, Americans chose more government activism and less freedom. This election, will we make the same mistake?

Today, we live in a malaise of government programs. We have a mountain of debt without a plan to pay it off. Instead of limited government and expanded freedoms, we have unlimited government and deteriorating freedoms. We call America the citadel of the free world, but are we truly free?

Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in the 1830’s that America must love freedom more than equality, because it’s easier to give up freedom, than cherish it. Freedom is hard, because it requires restrain, active participation, and good moral citizens to thrive. As English statesman Edmund Burke once said:

“But what is liberty without wisdom and without virtue? It is the greatest of all possible evils; for it is folly, vice, and madness, without tuition or restraint.”   

The foundation of freedom is human dignity, the unconditional love given to us as a gift by our Creator. To rebuild our Republic, we must first rebuild our trust in the Divine. To Reagan, conservatism was the ultimate defense of human dignity. Therefore, good government must be built on the foundation of human dignity.

Our opponents argue that we cannot go backwards. We must charge forwards and hope for the best. There is a different word for backwards: restore.

What if we restored our faith in Almighty God? What if we restored America to its Founding principles? What if we restored our belief that all life is a sacred gift? What if we restored our free market enterprise system? If we did, our Republic would embark on a slow, but steady restoration towards greatness. But, in order to do that, each American must ask this very question: Am I ready to make the tough decisions?

If we try to only restore our fragile economy, than we will most definitely fall again. We must first restore the moral order in our Republic.

Every political regime in human history has fallen when its people lose faith in their traditions and mores.  The Roman Republic died when its citizens lost faith in republican virtues. As the Roman statesman Cicero once wrote:

“Before our time, ancestral morality provided outstanding men, and great men preserved the morality of old and the institutions of our ancestors. But our own time having inherited the republic like a wonderful picture that had faded over time, not only has failed to renew its original colors but has not even taken the trouble to preserve at least its shape and outlines.”

We must not turn into a Republic in name only.

America excels when government is limited and people are free. Free to serve the poor. Free to volunteer at a veteran’s hospital. Free to worship God without restrictions or mandates. Ronald Reagan articulated this very message in 1964.

He understood that in order for our country to excel, the government’s actions must be limited and defined. Government must do what it does well and respect its limits so civil society and families can flourish on their own and achieve their God-given potential. Why is limited government so important?

Without limits, the State’s influence grows and disrupts civil society and the sources of our country’s prosperity. As Reagan explained during his speech:

“Now it doesn't require expropriation or confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism on a people. What does it mean whether you hold the deed to the—or the title to your business or property if the government holds the power of life and death over that business or property?”    

Ronald Reagan believed in the goodness of the American people, not the benevolent state. His message was simple: We are an exceptional nation, but we are only one generation away from losing our God-given rights.

Today, the Democrats’ slogan is to “move forward.” They promise if they get four more years, than our country will finally move in the right direction. They have no plan, except charge forward and hope for the best. To them, a dignified life at minimum must include a set of government benefits, not just a set of dreams.

This election, there is a moral imperative that we elect good moral people to represent us.

As conservatives, we honor Ronald Reagan for many reasons. Ultimately, we honor him because he always made the moral case for his thoughts and actions. As Reagan put it:

“There is a simple answer—not an easy answer—but simple: If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want our national policy based on what we know in our hearts is morally right.”

Let us secure the rewards of liberty, rather than fail because the challenge was too big.

Thank you and God Bless,

Joseph T. Turcotte

October 13 2012

Advice from the Ancients

"Before our time, ancestral morality provided outstanding men, and great men preserved the morality of old and the institutions of our ancestors. But our own time having inherited the republic like a wonderful picture that had faded over time, not only has failed to renew its original colors but has not even taken the trouble to preserve at least its shape and outlines. What remains of the morals of antiquity, upon which the Republic stood? We see that they are so outworn in oblivion that they are not only not cherished but are now unknown. What am I say about the men? The morals themselves have passed away through a shortage of men. It is because of our own vices, not because of some back luck, that we preserve the Republic in name only but have long ago lost its substance."

Cicero

A New Endorsement on a Pray: Mitt Romney

To a conservative, this presidential race is pathetic and troubling considering the path our country is heading towards. Two years ago I saw a true presidential candidate in Mitch Daniels. He has the executive experience grounded in liberty and self-government with the results any citizen looks at in aww. However, he decided not to run. Than I looked towards Newt Gingrich to provide conservative leadership, but he continues to fall short of delivering due to his lack of campaign organization and funding. I will always be a supporter of Newt, but it comes time to look at the reality and choose the best candidate to defeat President Obama, which is Mitt Romney.

I am not supporting Mitt because he articulates a conservative message that reaches all Americans. I am endorsing Romney because he is a fixer, which is what we need. He MUST govern as a conservative, but he must be bold. As Larry Kudlow continues to spell, Romney needs a bold pro-growth plan that will be a true constrast to Obama's 2.0% growth economy. Also as Jonah Goldberg stated, Romney can not govern as a moderate, because he would not get re-elected. Romney is a fixer, not a visionary. But I will support Mitt Romney as for President of the United States.

Partners with Youtube!

That's right, I am now partners with Youtube. You can sub to me and once dough comes rolling in I may put out some free Microsoft points for you guys! Things are looking up and why not reward the community for making me a partner with Youtube!

Shadow~

Let's go bruins!!

End of an Era?

Since Kendrick Perkins and Nate Robinson were traded on February 24th, all of Celtics Nations asked one simple question: Will this trade help us win another championship? The Celtics were defeated by the Miami Heat 97-87 last night, which gave ammunition to shoot at Danny Ainge. Ainge screwed up big time. Perkins did not fill the box score with points and assists, rather his job was to set screens for Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, and Rajon Rondo. His unselfishness was exactly what Doc Rivers asked from all of his players.

The acquisitions of Jeff Green and Nenad Krstic did not produce for the Celtics. Green looked lost on the floor. He either shot too much or too little. For a tall player, Green never average more than 4 rebounds. Krstic was a dumper version of Kevin Garnett. He only shot medium range jumpers and couldn't play defense. Here's a forecast for next year:

Coach: Doc Rivers will return with the Boston Celtics on a two year deal. Garnett and Allen both have two years left on their contract. Rivers last night stated he would come back, but a prolonged NBA Lockout might hurt River's will to come back and coach. His son, Austin Rivers is going to light up the college basketball world next year.

Players: 
Glen Davis- will leave, free agency and his desire to start on a crappy team
Delonte West- will return, KG is a mentor for West
Nenad Krstic- will leave, he sucks
Troy Murphy- will leave, he sucks
Shaquille O'Neal- will RETIRE, too old and injured

Next Year: With the lockout coming next year, I wouldn't be surprised if the Celtics make a huge overhaul of their roster. Oh Boy.

It's Time for Real Change

I was sitting in Professor Mahoney's Political Leadership class on Wednesday asking myself: What have I learned at Assumption College? (During the five minute break)

I then asked myself: What is the goal of college?

College is not JUST about finding a job, because I'm not doing so well in that department. College is not JUST about spending lots of money to hear sociologist professors bore me to death about "social problems" and about how we need to be concerned with everyone's feelings. College is not JUST about "wasted Wednesday" or "thirsty Thursday". College is not JUST about finding yourself as an individual at the age 21. That's what makes college so interesting and so frustrating.

Every college believes they have a special formula for success. I heard this on every tour I took during high school. College X said, "At college X every student has a unique experience to find their truth." What a load of crap. Studies have come out and said that a lot of college students don't learn anything during their time in college. WHAT? Here's a definition of College:

College is the decision for an individual to challenge himself by searching for the universal truth

Definition by the Sociologist Department: College is a special place for a person to evaluate his or her life and to find his or her truth according to his or her culture, lack of religion, and feelings.

Our educational system needs reform. Not one person would say our educational system doesn't need to be fixed. (Even School Administrators) Education is not just mathematics and science as President Obama stated during the State of the Union. Also, education is not just testing as President Bush instituted with the No Child Left Behind reform law. Teachers have little flexibility when "teachings for the test" and we wonder why kids love recess so much? So what do we do in our public school systems? Here's four changes that should be made.

4.) History teachers cannot and should not teach politics. Politics is the comprehensive grounding in the fundamental principles and problems of a science whose relevance to contemporary life is immediate, yet whose tradition is venerable. Students don't like politics, because they think it's two talking heads arguing. Politics needs to be taught by political scholars, not history teachers.

3.) Libraries are not just to use the computers. Libraries offer every individual an opportunity to learn. Reading is always better when it's not a "requirement for a class". Therefore, instead of just "recess" how about a time slotted during the day when students can take out a book and read, outside library time?

2.) Public schools should teach philosophy and theology. Huh? What do most people think of when they hear philosophy and theology: they think that's not useful? School Administrators would say it's unconstitutional because there's a complete separation between church and state in The Constitution. That argument doesn't hold water. The Constitution protects against our government from sponsoring a church such as the Anglican Church during the Revolutionary War. Religious freedom is right that all people must have. Philosophy and theology allow people to search for truth and develop spiritually as an individual.

1.) We must have a universal definition of a human being according to our human nature. If our society knows what it means to be human, than we can teach students about the true definition of human happiness.

Thank You.