Some of them where strong on reforming welfare, but for them it was "mend it, not end it".
The "business interest" side of conservatism, didn't care much about welfare (except to the extent it contributed to high taxes, and for those that where also deficit hawks, high deficits), the libertarian conservatives where generally agaisnt welfare spending or for only a minimal welfare state. Some of the "religious right" conservatives had more favorable views of the welfare state, but others focused more on responsibility, and where not fans of welfare.
Some examples of or comments on neoconservative views about social spending and welfare.
--------
Neoconservatism is a political philosophy that emerged in the United States. Its key distinction is in international affairs, where it espouses an interventionist approach that seeks to defend what neo-conservatives deem as national interests. In addition, unlike traditional conservatives, neoconservatives are comfortable with a minimally-bureaucratic welfare state; and, while generally supportive of free markets, they are willing to interfere for overriding social purposes.[1]
en.wikipedia.org
"The original neocons, like Irving Kristol and Norman Podhoretz, were former Democrats who accepted the welfare state, racial equality, and other liberal accomplishments while insisting on a more assertive foreign policy than the McGovernites wanted."
thinkingreed.wordpress.com
"
Norman Podhoretz is a leading figure of the so-called neoconservative movement. But he dislikes the label neoconservative" and instead refers to himself as a "liberal centrist." He portrays himself as a traditional Democrat in the John F. Kennedy mold: committed to strong national defense, anti-Communist containment and the modern welfare state.
questia-online-library.com
"I shall, to begin with, assume that the welfare state is with us, for better or worse, and that conservatives should try to make it better rather than worse...
...So in my welfare state with leave Social Security alone - except for being a big more generous perhaps. Certainly all restrictions on the earnings of the elderly should be abolished, as a matter of fairness. As for Medicare - well conservatives believe in honoring thy father and mother, and the Good Book does not say that such honor should be limited only to parents (or grandparents) who are in good health and do not live too long. Medicare's cost is not a conservative's problem, except for those conservatives whose Good Book is the annual budget.
As with the elderly so with children..."
Irving Kristol at
books.google.com
Now that a "neoconservative" has been idiotically redefined to mean a warmonger who never buys retail, we forget that much of neoconservatism was really an argument about domestic policy.
The basic neoconservative criticism of the welfare state was that it had most of its incentives lined up incorrectly. Young women were told that government would essentially pay them to have more babies out of wedlock. Criminals were led to believe it was someone else's fault they robbed liquor stores. Students weren't—and still aren't—compelled to excel at school.
The neocons didn't oppose the welfare state per se. They opposed a welfare state that made society worse. (Irving Kristol even argued for a "conservative welfare state.") Hence Social Security never bothered them much, because delaying subsidies until one's golden years is unlikely to create the sorts of perverse incentives that might lead to roving gangs of octogenarian car thieves.
The compassionate conservatism of such intellectuals as Marvin Olasky and Myron Magnet was really just a fleshing-out of these neoconservative observations (though, in Olasky's case, with a bit more religion thrown in).
article.nationalreview.com |
