Abu Hatem’s Political Views
Writing by abuhatem on Monday, 26 of November , 2007 at 11:56 am
I am a conservative, however I am a traditional conservative in the mold of old presidents Grover Cleavland and Calvin Coolidge, the late Senator Robert A. Taft, political philosophers Robert Nisbet, and Russell Kirk, as well as commentator Pat Buchanan, Congressman Ron Paul, and Senator Chuck Hagel .I am not a libertarian of any sort but a limited government constitutionalist. I concur with John Locke who said “a society without law is one without freedom.” I oppose many modern conservatives who have rejected traditional conservative principles such as the neoconservative believers in messianic war, and ultra-nationalist conservatives who believe patriotism entails ethnocentrism, nativism, and xenophobia.Although I am a conservative, I consider myself a moderate. Conservatism intrinsically is not a political philosophy, and Samuel Huntington notes that it is the only political theory which is not an ideology and does not aim for an Ideal or utopian society. Conservatism is divided into various branches including classical conservatism, traditionalism, and even classical liberalism (of which conservatism is a hybrid branch). Because true conservatism is not an ideology, the neoconservative movement cannot truly be called conservative by anyone true to the term. The true moderation amongst the extremes of anarchy and totalitarianism; stasis and revolution is in conservatism in the apolitical sense.My belief in conservatism, comes from my belief in Islam and natural law. Natural law or as Muslims called it sunnan Allah the traditions of God, are the natural human ingredients to order - whether spiritual, political, social, and economics. Islamic theology, as perhaps best expounded by the 10th century theologian Imam al-Ghazali, notes that God has certain sunnan or “laws” throughout his creation. One of these laws, in my belief, is the spontaneous order which results from human cooperative activity. Another of these laws is the importance which traditions play in laying the order to a good society. In this regard I agree with Burke and Hayek regarding the importance of the spontaneous evolution of order in human society and the importance of tradition. In all my entire political philosophy can be summed up in one sentence by the great Edmund Burke - “Good order is the foundation of all things.”Economically I am a firm believer in the market economy which rests on the base truth that man has a natural right to his life, and to the fruit of his labor - his property. I am a strong advocate for economic liberty, which is the essence of freedom. The school of economics I strongly sympathize with are the views of the Austrian school of economics specifically two of its late economists - Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek. Property is the cornerstone of liberty and is one of the most important aspects of civilization itself. Economic freedom entails economic opportunity and prosperity.As a believer in liberty, I am also a great proponent of the late great Karl Popper’s ideas, especially those espoused in The Open Society and Its Enemies, and his criticism’s of the tyrannous giants - Plato, Hegel and Marx. The open society is the one in which the citizen may redress and continually criticize and correct his government’s errors. Other political philosophers I enjoy include the founding fathers, notably Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, along with the great Alexis Tocqueville, and Edmund Burke.I am a firm believer in my Islamic tradition and its great defenders of economic freedom such as the great sociologist (and first supply-sider) Ibn Khaldun, and of course the greatest political leader of all time who was inspired by Almighty God - the Prophet Muhammad, may God bless him and give him peace.In terms of foreign policy, I am a non-interventionist. I morally disagree with aggressive war and imperialism. I strongly agree with the views of Thomas Jefferson, and oppose increasing involvement in the affairs of other nations. However, I agree with those of the realist persuasion of international relations, that states act in their best interest and it should be the policy of a state to look out for its national security, and this is best secured by increasing its relative power to other states. I understand the role power plays in international politics and thus am a strong proponent of a strong national defense. The strongest national defense we can have is one in which our defense budget is used for defense and not offense. I understand the views of realists in international relations who discuss the importance of realpolitik and balances-of-power in international politics as well as the need for deterrence. I differ from the realists when I emphasize the need and reality of morality in foreign relations. I am a strong opponent of neoconservatism which is simply a remasked version of Wilsonianism and the doctrine of spreading democracy by force. The most cogent and lucid argument concerning American grand strategy I have seen are those for a grand strategy of offshore balancing which maintains non-interventionism while being theoretically underpinned by realism. Offshore balancing is supported by such brilliant minds as Christopher Layne, Ron Paul’s foreign policy adviser Robert A. Pape, realist theorist Steven Walt.In terms of social values I am a social conservative. However, I am also a federalist and concur with Milton Friedman in the belief that issues dealing with morality are best solved through the local level and it would be better if state and local governments decided on issues such as to ban prostitution, gay marriage, and fornication - all of which I strongly oppose. I believe in the right to life, and thus oppose the abortion of the unborn unless the mother’s life is in danger. A society lacking in compassion, protection of the family, and the defense of human life and dignity will ultimately fail - as Ibn Khaldun’s analysis in the Muqaddimah make ever so clear.In terms of diversity I believe this country is built on immigrants and in pragmatic solutions to problems. In this sense I disagree with both the paleoconservative ultra-nationalist movement and the modern neoconservatives. I believe there is no rational basis for any solution to the illegal immigrant crisis is some sort of guest worker program. I also agree with amnesty for illegal immigrants who have not broken our laws, but the borders must obviously be secured. I believe in guest worker visas, and making it easier for the best and brightest minds to immigrate to our country.I am progressive in the sense that I believe in progress for humanity throughout history. I believe that we have gone a long way since the days of cavemen and tribes, and our modern rational states based on personal and economic liberty and Democratic ideals are proof of humanity’s progress. We are able to progress incrementally, through evolution - not radically through revolution. Yet from where we progress, we also decline, and so we must be weary of Utopian ideology and instead work for prudent reformation.I am conservative in the sense that I believe in the conservation of traditional time-tested values and ways of life which have worked in ensuring human happiness for millenniums.My traditional conservatism: anti-war, pro-market,pro-liberty and pro-tradition were perhaps best expounded upon by the great Russell Kirk who wrote the ten conservative principles. To recount some of Kirk:
A society in which men and women are governed by belief in an enduring moral order, by a strong sense of right and wrong, by personal convictions about justice and honor, will be a good society—whatever political machinery it may utilize; while a society in which men and women are morally adrift, ignorant of norms, and intent chiefly upon gratification of appetites, will be a bad society—no matter how many people vote and no matter how liberal its formal constitution may be.Conservatives are champions of custom, convention, and continuity because they prefer the devil they know to the devil they don’t know. Order and justice and freedom, they believe, are the artificial products of a long social experience, the result of centuries of trial and reflection and sacrifice. Thus the body social is a kind of spiritual corporation, comparable to the church; it may even be called a community of souls. Human society is no machine, to be treated mechanically. The continuity, the life-blood, of a society must not be interrupted. Burke’s reminder of the necessity for prudent change is in the mind of the conservative. But necessary change, conservatives argue, ought to he gradual and discriminatory, never unfixing old interests at once.Society requires honest and able leadership; and if natural and institutional differences are destroyed, presently some tyrant or host of squalid oligarchs will create new forms of inequality.To seek for utopia is to end in disaster, the conservative says: we are not made for perfect things. All that we reasonably can expect is a tolerably ordered, just, and free society, in which some evils, maladjustments, and suffering will continue to lurk. By proper attention to prudent reform, we may preserve and improve this tolerable order. But if the old institutional and moral safeguards of a nation are neglected, then the anarchic impulse in humankind breaks loose: “the ceremony of innocence is drowned.” The ideologues who promise the perfection of man and society have converted a great part of the twentieth-century world into a terrestrial hell.Separate property from private possession, and Leviathan becomes master of all. Upon the foundation of private property, great civilizations are built. The more widespread is the possession of private property, the more stable and productive is a commonwealth. Economic levelling, conservatives maintain, is not economic progress. Getting and spending are not the chief aims of human existence; but a sound economic basis for the person, the family, and the commonwealth is much to be desired.Although Americans have been attached strongly to privacy and private rights, they also have been a people conspicuous for a successful spirit of community. In a genuine community, the decisions most directly affecting the lives of citizens are made locally and voluntarily. Some of these functions are carried out by local political bodies, others by private associations: so long as they are kept local, and are marked by the general agreement of those affected, they constitute healthy community. But when these functions pass by default or usurpation to centralized authority, then community is in serious danger.The conservative endeavors to so limit and balance political power that anarchy or tyranny may not arise.Therefore the intelligent conservative endeavors to reconcile the claims of Permanence and the claims of Progression. He thinks that the liberal and the radical, blind to the just claims of Permanence, would endanger the heritage bequeathed to us, in an endeavor to hurry us into some dubious Terrestrial Paradise. The conservative, in short, favors reasoned and temperate progress; he is opposed to the cult of Progress, whose votaries believe that everything new necessarily is superior to everything old.
In the end, Kirk accounts for the difference between conservatives and their enemies:
The great line of demarcation in modern politics, Eric Voegelin used to point out, is not a division between liberals on one side and totalitarians on the other. No, on one side of that line are all those men and women who fancy that the temporal order is the only order, and that material needs are their only needs, and that they may do as they like with the human patrimony. On the other side of that line are all those people who recognize an enduring moral order in the universe, a constant human nature, and high duties toward the order spiritual and the order temporal.
There are generally three ingredients to the good civilization. First is a strong dedication to morality, the family, mutual compassion, friendship and ultimately peace. Second is a regime which respects and protects the natural rights of others - especially life, property, and privacy. And third is liberty, especially in the economic sense, which ultimately provides the basis of markets and progress or as Schumpeter said “creative destruction.” I believe Islamic and American civilization, for all of their faults throughout history, at one point in time embraced all three and thus prospered. It is for this reason I am a conservative.
Category: Uncategorized
- Add this post to
- Del.icio.us -
- Meneame -
- Digg
No comments yet.
