Thursday, October 16, 2008
Plumber Joe and the Culture of Freedom [Elaine Donnelly]
The attention given to "Joe the Plumber" in last night's presidential debate was encouraging. Finally, fundamental issues of economic freedom vs. social engineering are getting the attention they deserve. It all began when Democratic candidate Barack Obama encountered Joe Wurzelbacher on the campaign trail, and spoke to him in the language of socialism. Obama tried to convince the now-famous plumber, who wants to expand his business, that higher taxes are justified because “when you spread the wealth around, you help everyone.”
That phrase, “spread the wealth around,” is another name for income redistribution, or socialism—a philosophy that Americans traditionally have rejected. We do not agree that unaccountable government officials should have the right to take wealth from productive people for redistribution to others who are less successful. As Republican candidate John McCain said to a post-debate rally in Pennsylvania, “We didn’t become a great nation by ‘spreading the wealth,’ we became a great nation by creating new wealth.”
Janet Lynn, a former Olympic-medalist figure skater, military mom, and longtime friend, put a spotlight on the socialist philosophy in her thoughtful article “Preserving the Brilliant Dance Called Freedom.” Janet wrote from the perspective of a former world-class athlete and traveler who came to appreciate American freedom in personal ways. She expressed her concern that freedom itself is at risk in this election campaign, with the threat disguised in the mantra of "change." That appealing word, she wrote, eerily echoes a statement made to her years ago by an advocate of Soviet-style socialism: "Freedom is having everything given to you."
All the topics discussed in the debate touched on fundamental values, standards, and culture─a word defined most simply as “how things are done.” When lowered standards and compromised values weaken the culture of an institution, bad things happen and people can get hurt. The recent financial crisis, for example, began when liberals in Congress created intense pressure for “affirmative action” lending practices demanded by community activists such as ACORN.
Mandatory social engineering in the financial markets caused those institutions to change their culture. Unscrupulous officials found ways to make money in the process. Weeks before the disastrous consequences of easy-money subprime loans became apparent, House Financial Services Committee leaders Barney Frank (D-MA) and Maxine Waters (D-CA) insisted that enabling institutions Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were essentially sound and worthy of confidence.
They were wrong and probably knew they were wrong, but their underlying definition of "success" was different. Millions of innocent people are paying a high price for their social engineering and pressure for cultural change, which lowered standards and compromised sound financial principles.
Any institution that allows activist groups or politicians to undermine its fundamental culture in pursuit of questionable social goals invites incremental decline, weakness, and ultimate failure. But banks only play with money. My concern centers on the culture of the military, which has responsibilities far more serious than banks. The military is responsible for the lives of young men and women who volunteer to serve, as well as the freedoms that they defend.
Our volunteer force is strong, but its culture is vulnerable to political pressures from the same people whose demands have weakened many other institutions of American life. The next Commander in Chief must guard the unique culture of our military. It is the only one we have, and the freedoms we cherish depend on it.
10/16 04:25 PM