In political debate today, the ideals of equality and freedom need not be held in opposition. Even so, we all too often find them championed as conflicting principles. This perceived opposition stems from a basic truth about human society; that is, the persistence of poverty, both involuntary (through one’s environment) and voluntary (through poor choices). And not just material poverty (e.g. lack of health-care), but also spiritual poverty (e.g. lack of hope). This unhappy reality is something that conservatives and liberals alike acknowledge. We also both agree that government can, and should, play a role in the alleviation of poverty and inequality. Disagreement stems not from the presence of this problem, but as to how to define the government’s role in fixing it.

Conservatives are not anarchists. We believe that the government’s role is essential, but also that its role should be more limited and specific. We recognize that, as Jefferson stated, “The government can do something for the people only in proportion as it can do something to the people,” but conservatives would caution, “And it most certainly will do something to the people.” We believe that the continuous giving up of power from the private to the public sector is not only giving up freedom but is also a movement from efficiency to inefficiency; it ultimately can aggravate the problem of poverty by disempowering people with an overreaching paternal presence and authority.

Conservatives desire equality, but understand that this must be realized as an equality of opportunity. An attempted “equality of outcome,” whether legislated or purchased, will not solve society’s ills (e.g. the failure of the war on poverty). We, along with liberals, have a heart for the vulnerable, but we believe that individual needs and desires can only truly be met through the infinite ingenuity and responsiveness of persons and organizations within a politically decentralized economy. Our belief in this is based on both empirical evidence and rational thought. Spend an individual’s dollars for him and you stifle his freedom. Socialize his economic surplus and you eradicate his potential for problem solving, creativity and brilliance. You cannot paint a masterpiece by assigning one stroke each to 10,000 painters.

If your heart is bent toward justice, if you yearn for a society that promotes equality in wealth and aspiration, then realize that government alone will not satisfy your desire. No system has lifted more people from the grip of poverty than the private sector market economy. Our object must be to complement the market with focused policy, not to pair overreaching policy with a curtailed market. Erode the ability of the market to operate, centralize the political process, upend individual freedom and you might achieve a semblance of equality, but it will be a truly impoverished equality, one of both material and spiritual sickness.

Ethan Kay ([email protected]) is a sophomore studying physics, math, English and philosophy. He is a member of the College Republicans Communications Committee.