Introduction
The 1960s in the United States was a decade of profound political and cultural change. While often remembered for left-wing activism and counterculture movements, it was also a pivotal time for American conservatism. After two decades out of power, Republicans had reclaimed the White House in 1952 with the election of Dwight D. Eisenhower. However, many conservatives were dismayed to find the new Republican administration embracing an active role for government rather than scaling it back.
One of the leading voices calling for a return to conservative principles was Barry Goldwater, a senator from Arizona. Goldwater believed that at their core, American voters held conservative values. But to win them over, the conservative movement needed to articulate its ideals clearly and demonstrate that it stood for more than just protecting wealth and privilege.
In 1960, Goldwater published "The Conscience of a Conservative" - a manifesto that reinvigorated the American conservative movement and laid the groundwork for its eventual return to power later in the decade. This influential book outlined Goldwater's vision of conservatism and its core tenets. Let's explore the key ideas Goldwater presented and how he defined the conservative philosophy.
Conservatism Takes a Holistic View of Human Nature
One of Goldwater's central arguments is that, contrary to liberal claims, conservatism is not merely focused on economic issues or protecting the interests of the wealthy. Rather, conservatism takes a more comprehensive view of human nature and society.
The Liberal Focus on Material Needs
Goldwater contends that liberals tend to view politics primarily through the lens of satisfying people's material and economic needs. From the liberal perspective, if you provide people with food, shelter, clothing and other basic necessities, you've solved the most pressing societal problems. This leads to a focus on government programs aimed at meeting these material needs.
The Conservative View of Spiritual and Economic Needs
In contrast, Goldwater argues that conservatives recognize humans as both physical and spiritual beings. While meeting economic needs is important, conservatives believe nurturing the spiritual and moral side of human nature is equally crucial. This spiritual dimension encompasses things like individual liberty, personal responsibility, and the pursuit of meaning beyond mere material comfort.
The Importance of Individual Differences
Another key distinction is that economic needs can be met in largely uniform ways - everyone needs food and shelter. But spiritual and moral needs are more individualized. What gives meaning and fulfillment to one person may be very different for another. This is why conservatives emphasize maximizing individual liberty - so that each person can pursue what gives their own life purpose and meaning.
Economic and Political Freedom
For conservatives, true human flourishing requires both economic and political freedom. Economic freedom means not being overly dependent on the state for one's livelihood and material needs. Political freedom allows individuals to hold their own beliefs and make their own choices about how to live. Without both of these freedoms, people cannot fully develop their potential as spiritual beings.
The Need for Social Order
At the same time, conservatives recognize that absolute freedom is neither possible nor desirable in a society. As social creatures, humans need a degree of order and stability to thrive. This requires some limitations on individual behavior and the fulfillment of certain civic duties like paying taxes. The conservative aim is to strike the right balance between individual liberty and social cohesion.
By taking this more holistic view of human nature, Goldwater argues that conservatism offers a more complete political philosophy than liberalism. It seeks to nurture both the material and spiritual sides of humanity while preserving the freedom necessary for individuals to chart their own course in life.
Limited Government and the Constitution
A core tenet of Goldwater's conservatism is the principle of limited government, which he sees as essential for preserving individual liberty. He argues that the United States Constitution was explicitly designed to enshrine this principle, though both major political parties had strayed from it by the mid-20th century.
The Danger of Unchecked Government Power
Goldwater begins from the premise that government, by its very nature, involves some people having power over others. Throughout history, government has often been the primary instrument through which people's freedoms have been curtailed or eliminated. As the saying goes, "power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
Constitutional Limits on Federal Power
The genius of the U.S. Constitution, in Goldwater's view, is that it grants the federal government certain legitimate powers while also placing firm restrictions on the expansion of those powers. For instance, the Constitution allows the federal government to maintain internal order and a justice system. While these involve some coercive power, they are necessary to ensure that citizens can live peacefully and pursue their interests without fear of crime or injustice.
Separation of Powers
One of the key mechanisms for limiting government power is the separation of powers into three branches:
- The executive branch, which administers the government
- The legislative branch, which makes laws
- The judicial branch, which interprets laws and administers justice
This division was intended to create checks and balances, with each branch having an incentive to resist overreach by the others.
The Threat of Expanding Government
Despite these constitutional safeguards, Goldwater argues that by 1960, both Republicans and Democrats had greatly expanded the size and scope of the federal government beyond its intended limits. The annual federal budget had ballooned to $100 billion (equivalent to $874 billion today), up from just $30.5 billion three decades earlier. The government was now involved in everything from dictating what crops farmers could grow to setting wage levels for businesses.
Trading Liberty for Security
Goldwater contends that this expansion of government power occurred because politicians promised voters greater economic security in exchange for ceding more control to the state. While this may have seemed appealing in the short term, Goldwater sees it as a dangerous trade-off that erodes essential liberties over time.
By abandoning the principle of limited government enshrined in the Constitution, Goldwater believes both parties had undermined one of the key pillars of American freedom. Returning to this founding principle is thus essential for preserving individual liberty and preventing further encroachment by the state.
The Erosion of States' Rights
Another area where Goldwater sees a dangerous expansion of federal power is in the erosion of states' rights. He argues that preserving the autonomy of state governments is crucial for maintaining individual liberty and local control.
Constitutional Division of Powers
The U.S. Constitution deliberately delegates many areas of governance to the states rather than the federal government. These include things like public utilities, banking regulation, agriculture policy, education, and welfare programs. The Founding Fathers believed that most political questions were best settled at the local level rather than by a distant central government.
Federal Encroachment on State Authority
However, Goldwater contends that by the mid-20th century, the federal government had significantly blurred the line between state and federal jurisdiction. One key mechanism for this was the use of grants-in-aid or "matching funds" programs. These incentivize states to implement certain policies by offering federal money to match state spending in areas like healthcare, education, and welfare.
Problems with Federal Funding Programs
Goldwater identifies several issues with these federal funding programs:
They remove local control, with decisions about how money is spent being made in Washington rather than by local communities.
They amount to a form of bribery or blackmail of state governments. States feel compelled to accept federal funds and conditions to avoid losing out on money their citizens have paid in federal taxes.
If states refuse to participate, the federal government often implements its preferred policies anyway, bypassing state authority entirely.
Violation of the Tenth Amendment
In Goldwater's view, this federal overreach clearly violates the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, which reserves all powers not explicitly granted to the federal government to the states or the people. He argues that states have a right both to act and not act on various issues, as determined by their own citizens - not by federal mandates.
The Wisdom of Local Control
Goldwater contends that the Founding Fathers were right to emphasize local control of most political issues. After all, who knows better than New Yorkers whether New York needs a new highway? Who but Nebraskans can best determine if Nebraska's nursing programs are adequate? When the federal government makes these decisions, it not only oversteps its constitutional role but also deprives citizens of the right to determine their own local priorities and policies.
By eroding states' rights, Goldwater believes the federal government has removed an important check on its own power and undermined the principle of self-governance at the local level. Restoring this balance is thus a key conservative priority.
States' Rights and Civil Rights
Goldwater addresses the common argument that federal intervention in states' affairs is sometimes necessary to protect civil rights, particularly those of African Americans in the South. He contends that this view is based on a misunderstanding of the relationship between states' rights and civil rights.
Defining States' Rights and Civil Rights
Goldwater offers clear definitions of both concepts:
States' rights: As outlined in the Tenth Amendment, states may do anything not explicitly delegated to the federal government or prohibited by the Constitution.
Civil rights: Rights that are protected by valid laws. For a right to be enforceable, it must be codified in law and that law must be compatible with the Constitution.
Constitutional Limits
According to the Constitution, states' rights have one key limitation: they cannot infringe upon individual rights protected by federal law. Conversely, if a purported individual right conflicts with the legitimate powers of states, that right is not valid.
Examples of Protected Civil Rights
Goldwater acknowledges that some civil rights of African Americans are clearly protected by the Constitution and federal law. These include:
- The right to vote (protected by the Fifteenth Amendment)
- The right to make and enforce contracts
- The right to purchase, lease, and sell property
Areas Not Covered by Federal Civil Rights
However, Goldwater argues that federal civil rights protections do not extend to areas like mandating racially integrated schools. While he believes desegregation may be just and wise, he contends that neither black nor white children have a constitutional "civil right" to attend mixed-race schools.
The Supreme Court's Role
Goldwater points to the Supreme Court's 1954 decision in Brown v. Board of Education as an example of judicial overreach. While the Court ordered the desegregation of schools, Goldwater argues that it did so based on contemporary social views rather than a strict interpretation of the Constitution.
The Danger of Judicial Activism
In Goldwater's view, when courts base decisions on their own ideas of social progress rather than the Constitution, it undermines the rule of law and the separation of powers. This opens the door to further erosion of states' rights and individual liberties.
A Conservative Approach to Civil Rights
Goldwater's argument is not that civil rights are unimportant, but rather that they must be pursued within the constitutional framework of federalism and limited government. He believes that expanding federal power, even for ostensibly good causes, sets a dangerous precedent that can be used to justify further government overreach in the future.
By insisting on a strict interpretation of states' rights and civil rights as defined in the Constitution, Goldwater aims to protect individual liberty and local self-governance while still preserving essential federal protections against discrimination.
The Problem with Compulsory Union Membership
Goldwater turns his attention to the issue of labor unions, arguing that while they can serve a legitimate purpose, mandatory union membership undermines individual freedom and perverts the original intent of organized labor.
The Historical Role of Unions
As America industrialized in the late 19th century, workers often found themselves at a significant disadvantage when negotiating with powerful employers. Unions emerged as a way for workers to band together and increase their collective bargaining power. Goldwater acknowledges that this was a natural and legitimate response to the economic conditions of the time.
The Proper Function of Unions
In Goldwater's view, the appropriate role of a union is to act as a voluntary collective bargaining agent for workers who desire such representation. When unions stick to this function, they can be a legitimate means of pursuing economic justice and fair treatment for workers.
The Problem of Compulsory Membership
However, Goldwater argues that unions overstep their legitimate bounds when they seek to represent all workers in a workplace, regardless of whether those workers want union representation. He contends that mandatory union membership violates workers' freedom of association and turns unions into coercive rather than voluntary organizations.
An Illustrative Example
To illustrate this point, Goldwater presents a hypothetical scenario:
Bob has worked as a technician in a Pittsburgh factory for 20 years. One day, the United Electrical Workers (UEW) union becomes the recognized bargaining agent for his plant. While Bob supports the general idea of unions, he disagrees with the UEW's communist leadership. However, because the factory owner has agreed to the union's demand to represent all workers, Bob must join the UEW and pay dues if he wants to keep his job.
The Case for Right-to-Work Laws
Goldwater advocates for right-to-work laws as a solution to this problem. These laws prohibit contracts that make union membership a condition of employment, effectively making freedom of association a legally enforceable civil right in the workplace.
Addressing the Free Rider Argument
Unions often argue that right-to-work laws allow some workers to benefit from union-negotiated contracts without contributing to the union's upkeep. While Goldwater acknowledges this concern, he doesn't believe it justifies compulsory membership. He draws an analogy to charitable organizations like the Red Cross, which benefit everyone but don't compel donations.
The Power of Voluntary Association
Goldwater contends that if unions truly serve the interests of workers, most will voluntarily choose to join and support them. He believes that making membership optional would encourage unions to be more responsive to workers' needs and preferences.
By opposing compulsory union membership, Goldwater seeks to protect individual liberty in the workplace while still preserving workers' right to organize voluntarily. This position reflects the conservative emphasis on freedom of association and skepticism toward coercive collective arrangements.
Taxation and Individual Liberty
Goldwater argues that the growth of big government has fundamentally altered how Americans think about taxation. Instead of viewing it primarily as a question of individual liberty, many now see it mainly as a matter of public finance - focusing on how much money the government needs rather than how much it has a right to take from citizens.
Taxation as a Form of Unfreedom
Goldwater begins from the premise that we have a natural right to possess and use our property. In modern society, income is the most common form of property. Therefore, if the freedom to choose what to do with one's property is a key aspect of liberty, it follows that taxation inherently restricts freedom to some degree.
The Burden of Taxation: An Example
To illustrate the impact of taxation on individual liberty, Goldwater presents a hypothetical example:
John, a family man, earns $45,000 per year and works an average of 22 days per month. If 32% of his income goes to taxes ($14,400), this means that effectively, one-third of his monthly labor is dedicated to paying taxes. Put another way, for every three days John works, one day's labor goes entirely to the government, which then redistributes that wealth to others.
Determining Fair Taxation
While some level of taxation is necessary to fund legitimate government functions, Goldwater argues that current tax rates go far beyond what is justifiable. He proposes two key criteria for determining fair taxation:
The government should only take as much as it needs to fund its legitimate constitutional functions.
Each citizen should pay an equal percentage of their income, rather than using progressive tax rates.
The Problem with Progressive Taxation
Goldwater criticizes progressive tax systems that take a much higher percentage from high earners than from lower-income individuals. He sees this as a form of social engineering aimed at redistributing wealth rather than simply funding necessary government operations.
Debunking Revenue Arguments
Goldwater challenges the notion that high tax rates on the wealthy are necessary for government revenue. He points out that in 1960, the total revenue collected from income taxes beyond the 20% level amounted to just $43 billion - less than the government spent on agriculture alone.
A Flat Tax Proposal
Instead of progressive taxation, Goldwater advocates for a flat tax where all citizens pay the same percentage of their income. He argues this would be fairer and would limit the government's ability to use the tax system for social engineering or wealth redistribution.
By framing taxation primarily as a question of individual liberty rather than public finance, Goldwater seeks to shift the debate away from how much the government wants to spend and toward how much it has a right to take from citizens. This reflects the conservative emphasis on limited government and economic freedom.
The Dangers of the Welfare State
Goldwater identifies the growth of the welfare state as a new and insidious form of collectivism that threatens American freedom. He argues that while it may seem more benign than overtly socialist policies, the welfare state ultimately undermines individual liberty and personal responsibility.
The Decline of Marxism
For many years, Goldwater notes, the primary threat to American freedom came from Marxists who sought to socialize the means of production. This would have meant a Soviet-style economy owned and operated by the state. However, as Western countries recovered from the Great Depression and achieved unprecedented prosperity, Marxism lost much of its appeal to workers.
The Rise of Welfarism
In place of revolutionary Marxism, a new form of collectivism emerged: the welfare state. Goldwater argues that welfarism achieves many of the same goals as socialism but through more subtle means that are compatible with democratic governance.
How Welfarism Works
Instead of violently expropriating the wealthy, the welfare state uses taxation to redistribute wealth. By providing various benefits and services, the government makes citizens increasingly dependent on the state for their basic needs. In exchange for these benefits, voters grant the government ever-expanding powers.
The Erosion of Personal Responsibility
One of Goldwater's key criticisms of the welfare state is that it undermines individuals' sense of responsibility for their own well-being and that of their families and communities. As people come to rely on government programs rather than their own efforts or voluntary community support, they lose the self-reliance that Goldwater sees as essential to true freedom.
From Citizens to Subjects
Goldwater argues that this process gradually transforms free citizens into dependent subjects. As individuals become more reliant on the state, they lose the independence and self-determination that are hallmarks of genuine liberty.
The Corruption of Humanitarian Impulses
Another danger Goldwater identifies is how the welfare state corrupts genuine charitable impulses. He contends that when people vote for welfare policies, they may feel virtuous for supporting aid to the less fortunate. However, they are actually using the coercive power of government to force others to contribute to causes they may not support.
Voluntary Charity vs. Compulsory Redistribution
Goldwater argues that true virtue lies in voluntary charitable giving, not in voting to have the government take money from others. He believes individuals would be better served by donating directly to charities of their choice and allowing others the freedom to make their own decisions about how to use their resources.
The Slippery Slope of Government Expansion
A final concern Goldwater raises is that once the principle of government redistribution is accepted, there is no clear limiting principle. The welfare state tends to expand over time as politicians promise ever more benefits to win votes, leading to a continual growth in government power and erosion of individual liberty.
By framing the welfare state as a form of collectivism that undermines freedom and personal responsibility, Goldwater seeks to challenge its moral legitimacy despite its popular appeal. This reflects the conservative emphasis on limited government, individual liberty, and voluntary rather than coerced forms of social support.
Conclusion: The Conservative Vision
In "The Conscience of a Conservative," Barry Goldwater presents a comprehensive conservative philosophy that emphasizes individual liberty, limited government, and personal responsibility. He argues that conservatism offers a more holistic view of human nature than liberalism, recognizing both the material and spiritual needs of individuals.
Goldwater contends that the U.S. Constitution established a system of limited government designed to protect individual freedom, but that both major political parties had strayed from these principles by the mid-20th century. He sees the erosion of states' rights, the growth of federal power, compulsory union membership, excessive taxation, and the expansion of the welfare state as grave threats to American liberty.
Throughout the book, Goldwater emphasizes several key conservative principles:
- The importance of both economic and political freedom for human flourishing
- The need to strictly limit government power to its constitutionally defined roles
- The value of local control and decision-making over centralized federal authority
- The primacy of individual rights and responsibilities over collective action
- The superiority of voluntary association and charity over coerced redistribution
While some of Goldwater's specific policy positions may seem dated or controversial today, the core philosophical arguments he presents continue to shape conservative thought in the United States. His emphasis on constitutionally limited government, individual liberty, and skepticism toward centralized power remain key tenets of American conservatism.
"The Conscience of a Conservative" served as a rallying cry for the conservative movement in the 1960s, helping to articulate a coherent philosophy that went beyond simply opposing liberal policies. By presenting conservatism as a principled defense of freedom rather than merely a defense of wealth or tradition, Goldwater helped revitalize the American right and lay the groundwork for its eventual return to political power.
The book's enduring influence can be seen in how many of its themes continue to resonate in contemporary conservative discourse. Debates over the proper size and scope of government, the balance between federal and state power, and the tension between individual liberty and collective action remain at the heart of American politics more than half a century after Goldwater penned his conservative manifesto.
Ultimately, "The Conscience of a Conservative" presents a vision of America rooted in the principles of the Constitution, emphasizing limited government, individual freedom, and personal responsibility. While readers may agree or disagree with Goldwater's specific arguments, the book provides a clear and forceful articulation of conservative philosophy that continues to shape political debate in the United States to this day.