Defining our nation's current most politically correct stance.

     Matters of society are rarely black and white. A "litmus test" proving the validity or ineptness of a political stance is rarely forthcoming, and most issues are largely subjective. However, there are exceptions. In the political arena, Americans choose to be liberal or conservative. Within these two "sides" of the political playing field, distinctions are further made with the additional labels of moderate, far left or right, etc to further elaborate on the particularities of ideology. But what is American government about? Conservatism. That's right. Less government equals more freedom. The different political stances should be not conservative vs. liberal, but shades of conservatism in debate with each other. Of course, its all relative. To the ultra-conservative, the moderate conservative is "liberal". A better understanding of this conservatism is needed.     What is a conservative? As previously stated, there are different "shades" of conservatism, as there are with liberalism. But the defining factor in the conservative ideology is that they are more conservative than liberal. This is an obvious notion that seems absurd to even mention, but what does it mean? A primary view of conservatism is that, broadly, it advocates smaller government vs. bigger government. so who in our government is conservative? Looking at the numbers, it appears there are very few conservatives indeed. When is the last time the government spent less? When was the last budget decrease? When was the last law repealed? The last program eliminated (or even reduced)? This is the litmus test of conservatism, unless of course the government is perceived by the conservative ideology to be sufficiently small already.     It becomes obvious that the question of "conservative vs. liberal" isn't even relevant. Our government is liberal. There is no reduction in the size and scope of government. There is no returning of responsibility to the private sector. There is only growing increases in federal responsibility, federal spending, and federal interventionalism both here and abroad. The only question left is "what kind of liberal are you?"     When the exeedingly rare actual conservative makes an attempt to reduce the size and scope of our bloated government, this is what generally happens; a program or other expenditure is slated for removal or reduction. Once this plan for reduction is made known, the group or groups that "benefit" from this program or expenditure rise up in protest. The program provides a "free" service to the people, and said groups make sure everyone knows this (If you remove my free housing, where will I live?). Private sector alternatives to the grossly ineffective federal nanny version are never presented to the people because those with sense cannot be heard over the multitudes crying out for "justice". The people of this nation have been reduced from the status of master of their fate and their government to slaves of the state. Without the help of the state there is no hope. Without the government's programs, we cannot support ourselves. We cannot survive.     "Here government, take my money and spend it in my best interests! You, oh mighty omnipotent government, know infinitely better than I what is best for me! How could anyone be foolish enough to believe that they, ignorant as they are, would be able to decide for themselves how to survive? I trust you, divine and benevolent government, to ensure my safety and happiness. I am your servant, you are my master." Such is the mindset of 21st century America.     In such an environment, how can we expect to find actual conservatives? Such a widespread problem is very nearly impossible to overcome. The only real way to reduce the size of government is to actually do it, and do it decisively. It is a change in the ideology of this nation that is required; or more accurately, a return to an ideology.     We have to decide as a nation that the government has a specific job, decide what exactly that job is, then persistently ensure that it resides perpetually within that description. The government has become a living entity. Like all living entities, it places high value on its survival and success. It is the natural tendency of government to gravitate toward that which ensure its survival. The best way it can do this is to create a situation in which the population is dependent upon the government. The more dependencies it can create, the more indespensible it becomes, until finally, the populace has all faith in the government to provide and none in their own abilities. Obviously, this nation's citizens are not at this time completely dependent upon the state to provide every need. Such a state is socialism, and we have not yet achieved that low in government ideology. But, as government grows, as it gradually acquires more and more of our duties and responsibilities onto itself, and less and less is required or expected of the individual, we become less and less a free nation and more and more a government controlled one. The more responsibility the government has, the less we have; the less accountability we have for our own actions. With this loss of responsibility and accountability comes a proportional loss in freedom and individual liberty. All the while the government gets more and more of what we give up. It is in this way that liberty dies almost imperceptibly by degrees. Like an aging man not realizing the degradation of his failing body, it fades and dies in its sleep without a whimper or a wail.     Perhaps it will help to reframe our thinking. When this country was founded, it was not, as many assume, a successful attempt at forming a new free government. It was instead a semi-successful attempt at establishing liberty for people from government. We now give the government whatever it wishes of us to ensure that it will provide for us. Instead of demanding freedom from government, we now run to openly embrace eternal intimacy with it. Government is not the solution. Government is the problem. Its a problem we all share, and one we all will have to decide to correct.