TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Reconciling "small government" with "moral intervention"

Go To

TheGloomer Since: Sep, 2010
#1: Jan 11th 2011 at 7:06:48 AM

The terms I have used in the thread title probably aren't especially apt. You shall have to forgive me; they were the first that came to mind and they seemed appropriate to me.

Anyway, to business. Last week I was in the university library to revise for a politics exam. I encountered a book of collected essays which described and explained political ideologies, extracted from books or lectures by major proponents of each. One which interested me was that on religious conservatism.

One discrepancy that made me think was the fact that the writer seemed to be a proponent of small government in the non-interventionist sense, but at the same time he was quite strong in his insistence that the federal government should intervene in the interests of Christian values and overturn state legislation or judicial rulings which do not uphold said values. The problem as I see it is that his specific qualification for "small government" was "one that does not intervene in the affairs of private citizens or states".

If he had defined "small government" in a literal sense (reduction of bureaucracy etc.) there wouldn't be anything terribly inconsistent. As it stands, this sentiment seems somewhat hypocritical to me. At least with a liberal one usually knows where one stands on this issue; they'll speak in favour of big government and, for better or for worse, will typically pursue policies which facilitate an increase in the size of government or lead to government intervention.

Does anyone have any thoughts?

Linhasxoc Since: Jun, 2009
#2: Jan 11th 2011 at 7:34:47 AM

I've certainly noticed this too.

And I do know some of these people. They're very friendly (mostly) but the thing is, they tend to think of Christianity as the center of the world. I suspect on some level they don't even think of it as a contradiction.

Deboss I see the Awesomeness. from Awesomeville Texas Since: Aug, 2009
I see the Awesomeness.
#3: Jan 11th 2011 at 7:36:42 AM

You're assuming that the various things that get lumped in with one political ideology are related rather than just thrown together.

Fight smart, not fair.
TheGloomer Since: Sep, 2010
#4: Jan 11th 2011 at 7:41:55 AM

You may very well be correct, though I would have expected some measure of consistency.

And I do know some of these people. They're very friendly (mostly) but the thing is, they tend to think of Christianity as the center of the world. I suspect on some level they don't even think of it as a contradiction.

I suppose that's a reasonable conclusion. I can think of a good local example of that kind of attitude (though he has calmed down significantly in his old age). Then again, it doesn't seem unreasonable to me, because putting Christianity at the centre of the world is what I imagine a good Christian should do (well, more accurately they should put Jesus at the centre of the world, but that's not really the debate). It's not a belief that one can really reconcile with pursuit of non-interventionist government.

edited 11th Jan '11 7:48:22 AM by TheGloomer

Deboss I see the Awesomeness. from Awesomeville Texas Since: Aug, 2009
I see the Awesomeness.
#5: Jan 11th 2011 at 8:27:27 AM

You may very well be correct, though I would have expected some measure of consistency.

Why?

Fight smart, not fair.
TheGloomer Since: Sep, 2010
#6: Jan 11th 2011 at 8:58:21 AM

I honestly don't know. I suppose I'm overestimating common sense. Now that I think again, I think this ties to another of my opinions; human selfishness is matched only by their talent for self-delusion.

breadloaf Since: Oct, 2010
#7: Jan 11th 2011 at 9:04:12 AM

It's not inconsistent if you think about it in terms of "Government that does everything for my, and my perceived social group's, sole benefit at the expense of everything else".

EnglishIvy Since: Aug, 2011
#8: Jan 11th 2011 at 9:08:11 AM

There are a lot of people who want the church to do it instead of the state.

Deboss I see the Awesomeness. from Awesomeville Texas Since: Aug, 2009
I see the Awesomeness.
#9: Jan 11th 2011 at 9:31:37 AM

Or that they're just different people under the same party.

Fight smart, not fair.
TheGloomer Since: Sep, 2010
#10: Jan 11th 2011 at 10:05:22 AM

There are a lot of people who want the church to do it instead of the state.

Perhaps so, but that isn't what this writer was suggesting, and I can only assume that there are several important people who share his views.

RalphCrown Short Hair from Next Door to Nowhere Since: Oct, 2010
Short Hair
#11: Jan 11th 2011 at 11:37:05 AM

Compare and contrast: there is no distinction between Church and State in most Muslim countries. You don't hear them crying for smaller government, though, and they're pretty doggone conservative.

What you have here are two separate messages that have one goal: get conservatives elected. The government haters and the fundamentalists may overlap, but that's not the point. When you oversimplify your message and you've trained your audience not to think things through, you get this kind of cognitive dissonance.

Under World. It rocks!
Pykrete NOT THE BEES from Viridian Forest Since: Sep, 2009
NOT THE BEES
#12: Jan 11th 2011 at 11:49:57 AM

I can sort of see where they're coming from. The sorts of things people usually push for on this level are Broad Strokes things like abortion, etc. that don't come up very often in one's everyday life. They could still easily be opposed to shit like this or this for being a level of bureaucracy that invades and tries to micromanage your everyday life, or this for being an extremely invasive and feckless security measure that cannot be bypassed without being molested.

JosefBugman Since: Nov, 2009
#13: Jan 11th 2011 at 11:50:19 AM

That's because the state is usually a dictatorship (or a theocracy with one guy at the head) and "small government" doesn't really come into discussion in a dictatorship unless you want to suddenly vanish into thin air.

Filby Since: Jan, 2001
#14: Jan 11th 2011 at 11:57:25 AM

Or suddenly vanish in a crowded stadium as an example to the masses.

Madrugada Since: Jan, 2001
#15: Jan 11th 2011 at 12:38:04 PM

The most apt working definition of "small government", for most people who use it and who are not political science scholars speaking in that role, is "Government that doesn't interfere with my desires and ambitions." Cynical, I know.

Linhasxoc Since: Jun, 2009
TheGloomer Since: Sep, 2010
#17: Jan 11th 2011 at 2:11:18 PM

If we take this as true, how would a politican who shares the attitude of the author react to somebody who feels that imposing religious values on them is an infringement of their personal liberty? At what point would they concede that they have facilitated the creation of an interventionist state?

Hypothetically speaking, because no human being would admit to being wrong if they have nothing to gain from it.

edited 11th Jan '11 2:14:11 PM by TheGloomer

Pykrete NOT THE BEES from Viridian Forest Since: Sep, 2009
NOT THE BEES
#18: Jan 11th 2011 at 3:25:24 PM

The most apt working definition of "small government", for most people who use it and who are not political science scholars speaking in that role, is "Government that doesn't interfere with my desires and ambitions." Cynical, I know.

Cynical but often true.

storyyeller More like giant cherries from Appleloosa Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: RelationshipOutOfBoundsException: 1
More like giant cherries
#19: Jan 11th 2011 at 3:41:19 PM

"Small government" is just a myth to get people elected anyway. There's not a single politician in congress willing to make meaningful cuts. It's not necessary a personal failing, just a consequence of the way congress works.

Blind Final Fantasy 6 Let's Play
CountDorku Behold my legal acumen! from the depths of insanity (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Above such petty unnecessities
Behold my legal acumen!
#20: Jan 11th 2011 at 3:46:28 PM

As I understand, the US definition of 'small government' means that the government is:

  1. Largely devoid of power, making it pointless, or
  2. Run by Republicans.

BalloonFleet MASTER-DEBATER from Chicago, IL, USA Since: Jun, 2010
MASTER-DEBATER
#21: Jan 11th 2011 at 3:55:59 PM

It means you fuck over social programs and the common welfare of the citizens in general for the sake of a small oligarchy, while jerking off the military to a frankenstein and polluting the country with "military values" & forcing fundamentalism and disdain of science down the throat of regions of the country that disagree with that mentality.....

my bias is blatant evil grin

WHASSUP....... ....with lolis!
silver2195 Since: Jan, 2001
#22: Jan 11th 2011 at 3:58:52 PM

jerking off the military to a frankenstein

What does that even mean?

Currently taking a break from the site. See my user page for more information.
Tzetze DUMB from a converted church in Venice, Italy Since: Jan, 2001
feotakahari Fuzzy Orange Doomsayer from Looking out at the city Since: Sep, 2009
Fuzzy Orange Doomsayer
#24: Jan 11th 2011 at 4:01:54 PM

I suppose the real "small government" party is the Libertarians. (The Tea Party had something going too, but I think they've lost their way in that regard.)

That's Feo . . . He's a disgusting, mysoginistic, paedophilic asshat who moonlights as a shitty writer—Something Awful
DeMarquis (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#25: Jan 11th 2011 at 4:03:11 PM

"Small government" generally means one that collects less wealth in the form of taxes, which according to belief means that it is free to flow within the market, leading to economic development. For many US conservatives, it's strictly a financial thing, with little connection to one's views regarding institutionalized religious values.

That said, the large majority of US citizens identify themselves as Christians but put "separation of church and state" (as well as personal tolerance) central to their value system. Most of us are smart enough to realize that if the government starts picking sides, it wont end well at all.

I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.

Total posts: 35
Top