I was reading comments on an article about Sarah Palin and saw the following comment:

"conservatives...their ideas turn the stomachs of many Americans"
Which ideas lilly?
According to lilly, conservatives want to:
"Protect hate speech?"
Example please lilly
"Overturn Civil Rights law?"
Which one lilly?
"Shut down the public school system?"
Where lilly?
"Get rid of labor unions"
Example lilly please?
"(Get rid of the) minimum wage"
Evidence lilly?
"let Corporate America put an end to paid sick days and vacation, safe working conditions, and reasonable work hours?"
Please lilly provide an example of this?
"Make science answer to religion?" what?
"Dump sick illegal immigrants in the street"
Example please lilly?

The problem I have with this is that the nominal conservative was arguing that Lily was mistakenly characterizing conservatism, while I find her "stomach turning" positions pretty accurate. I think she is wrong in saying they are "stomach turning", but they are definitely the positions I have espoused.

Let us list them:

1. Protect hate speech
2. Overturn civil rights laws
3. Shut down the public school system
4. Get rid of labor unions
5. End the minimum wage
6. Allow corporations to... well, the list is long, so let us say "unlimited right of contract between workers and employers"
7. Make science answer to religion
8. Dump sick illegal aliens on the street

Except for the last two, all of them are accurate, at least in some respects. They may be a bit exaggerated, or place the emphasis in a funny way, seeing the issues through liberal-tinted glasses, as it were. A few overstate the position, or confuse the issue by, for example, equating affirmative action with all "civil rights", but other than seven and eight, they are positions I can safely say I support.

Let us look at each and explain why:

1. Protect hate speech

This one I don't get. The left used to be the party of unrestricted speech. They liked it so much they even turned the nice clear word "speech" into the nebulous "expression" to protect flag burning, nude writhing, "performance art" and a host of other bizarre behavior. But now they have decided that too much freedom is a bad thing, and "hate speech" needs to be banned. In other words, we need to be treated like elementary school students and muzzled lest we hurt one anothers' feelings. I have explained in "The Danger Inherent in Banning "Bad Ideas", "In Defense of Discrimination" and "Back Again" why this is an incredibly bad idea, and recently elaborated on it in "Regulated Speech ". I don't find it a controversial position, and at one time liberals would not have either, but controversial or not, extreme or not, I believe that all speech is protected, and that includes speech someone tries to dub "hate speech".

2. Eliminate civil rights

This one is either so broad as to be laughable, or a disingenuous attempt to make legal preferences respectable by confusing them with all manner of "civil rights".

"Civil rights" are, despite the modern usage, all rights conferred on a citizen. So unless I am denying people all rights whatsoever, this is nonsense. Of course, in modern parlance "civil rights" means laws relating to discrimination. And, as you saw in the articles cited earlier ("In Defense of Discrimination" and "Back Again") I believe this is an issue best solved through social change, and not through government intrusion. In "Utopianism and Disaster" I discussed this very topic, and pointed out that, while the left often wants to use the state to solve any situation which falls short of perfection, in reality such "solutions" usually end up worse than the original situation. And this is no different. Extremist or not, I would favor eliminating anti-discrimination laws in favor of a colorblind government.

3. Shut down the public schools

Of course I am in favor of this. The public schools are an unmitigated disaster. That many conservatives are not in favor of shutting them down puzzles me. Conservatives understand that the government is lousy at providing goods and services, except when it comes to public education, and then many seem to forget that simple principle. If you want a more comprehensive argument see my posts "You Don't Drown in a Glass of Water - Vouchers Revisited", "Why Vouchers are not the Answer" and "Never Ascribe To Evil, A Discussion of Education". I know it is probably considered "extremist" because so many conservatives are inconsistent on this point, but I am clearly in favor of shutting down public schools.

4. Get rid of labor unions

This is the first point where I am not literally in agreement. I don't think we should prohibit labor unions. Anyone can form any club or organization they want, and anyone is free to join. But I would favor eliminating the special rights given to labor unions. The ability to restrict employment to union members, to force employers to engage in collective bargaining and the rest. If employers voluntarily sign agreements with unions, that is their business, but when the government forces them to negotiate with unions, that is wrong. Unions should have no more rights than the club of stamp collectors, the free masons or the rotary. So, I guess I do not agree completely, as I would leave the unions in existence, I would just see that they no longer had any special privileges. (This is really just an extension of number 6. See below)

5. End the minimum wage

I have written on this specific issue a few times ("How Democrats Keep the Poor Poor", "Unfair Advantage and Foreign Trade", "Hope You Like Unpaid Internships", "Inescapable Logic", "In A Nutshell"), and I am shocked that any conservative would deny that they were opposed to eliminating the minimum wage. The fact has been well established that all minimum wage does is eliminate entry level jobs, as well as providing less employment for the poorest and least skilled. That the original comment argued conservatives were not for eliminating minimum wage shocked me.

6. Freedom of contract in employment

This is really the blanket category which covers number 4 and 5. And again, I am surprised that conservatives would argue they were for retaining limits on employment contracts. Yes, Lily worded it as "eliminating health and safety" and getting rid of the 40 hour week, but the truth is employers would be forced to follow prevailing policies concerning hours of labor, and safety and other policies would be enacted through self interest. I covered all this in "Exploiting Workers?", "Fairness and the Free Market", "Capital Investment", "Exploited Labor" and "Greed Versus Evil", as well as "Child Labor and the Industrial Revolution" and "Business Licensing and Regulation". The truth is, the government did very little to improve working conditions, wealth did. And were the government to do nothing, working conditions would change very little.

7. Science Answer to Religion

I have to say I am not sure what this means. Maybe it is some sort of "social conservative" thing, about forcing Intelligent Design into schools. If that is the case, then I am opposed, though only because I believe schools should be privatized to avoid such problems. (See "Reforming Education") Then again, maybe it is about stopping funding for stem cell research, but if so, that is a bit misleading, as not only was stem cell research not banned ("Incorrect Argument"), but government money wasn't even entirely stopped, only restricted to certain lines. In any case, were it up to me, the government would not be funding any research, so science would be free of religion, as the government would not fund anything. (See "Private and Public Coexisting", "Time to End the NEA", "Skeptics? Really? I Beg to Differ", "Insufficient Skepticism" and "The Inherent Disappointment of Authoritarianism".) So, this one doesn't seem to apply to me, unlike the first six.

8. Sick aliens in the streets

I think this might be a complaint about providing free care to illegal aliens, but if so it is misguided. As I would deport illegals once we identified them, and would allow contagious illness as a bar to immigration, there would be no sick aliens on the streets, they would be on a bus or ship home. So, once again, this one doesn't seem to apply to me, though I think Lily would find my position even more horrific. (Actually, in an ideal world, I would allow pretty liberal immigration, but I recognize the real world may require some compromises. See "Cheap Lighters, Overseas Dumping and Monopolies".)

Conclusion

I am not sure what bothers me more, Lily's absurd list or the fact that a conservative felt the need to deny most of the points. The truth is, Lily was right in about 75% of her arguments, I just don't think they would turn the stomach of your average American. Most Americans distrust public schools, dislike affirmative action, think unions are no longer useful, and want to have more freedom from the state. Yes, the average American, raised as he has been with big government, may not quite comprehend the best course to pursue (See "What We Deserve", "Don't Blame the Politicians ", ""Doing Something" Revisited" and "The Difficulty of Principle", as well as "The Best Historical Example", which explains how we got there), but he still has a general feeling that he wants less government. He may need help in seeing his way there, may need time to learn what is and is not a good idea and what is and is not the proper role of government, but I think Lily is wrong in confusing the average American with a big government enthusiast.

And the writer who responded is equally deluded in thinking his attempts to deny Lily's descriptions is a conservative position. Conservatives should proudly assert their agreement with the points Lily made, and then explain why they are such good ideas, not deny them. But recently it seems more and more people are claiming to be conservatives, yet showing more acceptance of big government than the liberals of my youth. Just one more sign of the sad times in which we live.

POSTSCRIPT

It is possible I mistook the intent of the writer, or the message was insufficiently clear. Should the person who wrote this response to Lily come by this blog, feel free to explain your argument. If I am wrong, I will happily apologize. But from my reading, actually several readings, it seems you are denying that conservatives support any of the positions Lily attributes to them, and I can say, with certainty, many conservatives support some or all of those positions. And, in my mind, real conservatives should support the first six points I listed. Some may argue over one or two specifics, but I know any number of conservatives who would agree that the list is far from controversial, and hardly outside the conservative mainstream.

POSTSCRIPT II

It is completely off topic, but while researching the links in this post, I came across an old post, "Almost Right",  that deserves to be revived. It concerns some of the earlier arguments in health care reform, and is quite interesting.