Who really cares?
By Thomas Sowell
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
More frightening than any particular beliefs or policies is an utter lack of any sense of a need to test those beliefs and policies against hard evidence. Mistakes can be corrected by those who pay attention to facts but dogmatism will not be corrected by those who are wedded to a vision.
One of the most pervasive political visions of our time is the vision of liberals as compassionate and conservatives as less caring. It is liberals who advocate "forgiveness" of loans to Third World countries, a "living wage" for the poor and a "safety net" for all.
But these are all government policies -- not individual acts of compassion -- and the actual empirical consequences of such policies are of remarkably little interest to those who advocate them. Depending on what those consequences are, there may be good reasons to oppose them, so being for or against these policies may tell us nothing about who is compassionate or caring and who is not.
A new book, led "Who Really Cares" by Arthur C. Brooks examines the actual behavior of liberals and conservatives when it comes to donating their own time, money, or blood for the benefit of others. It is remarkable that beliefs on this subject should have become conventional, if not set in concrete, for decades before anyone bothered to check these beliefs against facts.
What are those facts?
People who identify themselves as conservatives donate money to charity more often than people who identify themselves as liberals. They donate more money and a higher percentage of their incomes.
It is not that conservatives have more money. Liberal families average 6 percent higher incomes than conservative families.
You may recall a flap during the 2000 election campaign when the fact came out that Al Gore donated a smaller percentage of his income to charity than the national average. That was perfectly consistent with his liberalism.
So is the fact that most of the states that voted for John Kerry during the 2004 election donated a lower percentage of their incomes to charity than the states that voted for George W. Bush.
Conservatives not only donate more money to charity than liberals do, conservatives volunteer more time as well. More conservatives than liberals also donate blood.
According to Professor Brooks: "If liberals and moderates gave blood at the same rate as conservatives, the blood supply of the United States would jump about 45 percent."
Professor Brooks admits that the facts he uncovered were the opposite of what he expected to find -- so much so that he went back and checked these facts again, to make sure there was no mistake.
What is the reason why some people are liberals and others are conservatives, if it is not that liberals are more compassionate?
Fundamental differences in ideology go back to fundamental assumptions about human nature. Based on one set of assumptions, it makes perfect sense to be a liberal. Based on a different set of assumptions, it makes perfect sense to be a conservative.
The two visions are not completely symmetrical, however. For at least two centuries, the vision of the left has included a belief that those with that vision are morally superior, more caring and more compassionate.
While both sides argue that their opponents are mistaken, those on the left have declared their opponents to be not merely in error but morally flawed as well. So the idea that liberals are more caring and compassionate goes with the territory, whether or not it fits the facts.
Those on the left proclaimed their moral superiority in the 18th century and they continue to proclaim it in the 21st century. What is remarkable is how long it took for anyone to put that belief to the test -- and how completely it failed that test.
The two visions are different in another way. The vision of the left exalts the young especially as idealists while the more conservative vision warns against the narrowness and shallowness of the inexperienced. This study found young liberals to make the least charitable contributions of all, whether in money, time or blood. Idealism in words is not idealism in deeds.
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Ins ute and author of Basic Economics: A Citizen's Guide to the Economy.
Be the first to read Thomas Sowell's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox. Sign up today!
Copyright © 2006 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.
We covered another review of that book last week...the libs REALLY don't like it. Got to get the book, but I can't right now....going to donate some blood on my way to the homeless shelter. I'll stop by GoodWill on the way and drop off some stuff, I think.
Is this the same Hoover Ins ute where big thinkers were cherry picked to draw up plans for post-war Iraq? Yep, they submitted their plans to the white house just before the invasion.
Just thought I'd throw that in.
Hey messenger!
BLAM!
every study I've read supports the argument that conservatives donate more time and money to charities.
Maybe it's through liberal activism that pulls the guilt trigger in the conservative mind.
Maybe it's voting liberal that gives those hypocrites warm fuzzies rather than deriving that feeling from actual personal charity and sacrifice.
I think giving our children and money to a war we were tricked into fighting is sacrifice enough. Is that not enough giving for a conservative cause?
Change subject much?
Easier than dropping a dime in the kettle, I guess - if it makes you feel better.
Here's a relevant anecdote from Ken Jennings blog:
Name-dropping
Then, of course, we could always talk about the Clintons claiming Bubba's donated underwear as a charitable contribution.
Bush is full of charity. Terrorist want to bring us down. Bush did it for them. Beware of gifts from wolves in sheeps clothing.
So what if conservatives give to charity. Does that wash away the stains of crippling our country? Conservatives wrecked our standing in the world, but they give to charity? At least when Clinton was pres. the world looked to us for hope and we gave them hope. Isn't that charity? In 6 short years we went from being the cats meow to cat litter.
This isn't about politics, per se. It's about people's personal decisions on what they are going to do with their own time, money and blood. If it makes you feel good to pull a lever, push a button, or fill in a little bubble, and feel that, in that single act, you are a better person than every conservative ever born, because you are SO enlightened....it's about what I suspected.
Oh my Libs, did we hit a nerve. I know, I know, you always give freely with
taxpayer money.
This is the best you guys can come up with after getting kicked out of Congress?
yeah those free lunch program for poor kids at schools does nothing for society.. take away the program and some conservative will come along and save the day..
No a nerve wasn't hit it's just that conservatives don't are what happens to the down trodden in our society..end all social programs, food stamps, ... but,but,but they give to charity and blood..
It's a feeble attempt to find anything worthy in a conservative corpse.
Yep, we hit a nerve.
Don't parents feed kids at home any more. Don't they get food stamps
or debit cards to buy food? And the taxpayers still have to feed the kids at
school. Sounds like Child Welfare needs to start looking into some of this.
Or maybe the politicians need to look at duplication of services.
No Ray you haven't hit a nerve with me. I am confortable in who I am and I am rasing a young man who will care about his fellow man. While you on the other hand raise childcren to look down on the poor and label them as being lazy.
Earth to ray not all parents are responsible.. not all are around.. I guess those kids are just out of luck mr compassionate conservative?
Hey X, you just suggested that conservatives cut-off their generous charity.
As Regan said: There you go again. Attack, attack and attack. Well folks you
can go suck a lemon as far as I am concerned. And about my kids. All my kids
have worthwhile and meaningful jobs, like nursing and teaching. Your kids may
even be in their class. Hmmmmmmmm, now there is a thought. Scare you a little
bit? And for goodness sakes don't get sick, you might draw one of them as your
nurse......hehehehehe. Another scary thought. Just think what I put in their heads.
Like: Responsibility, stick with what you start and care of others. I know, I know
more scary thoughts. But you know us old military types. All we want to do is
hurt people and break things.
You people are so dumb you couldn't pour water out of a boot if it had
instructions on the heel.
^uh oh. Rays breaking down again.
Not at all. If they're anything like you, my kids would be alot smarter than them and never listen to them.Scare you a little
bit?If you put in their heads the idea to break their hippocratic oath, there would be a problem. Otherwise no.And for goodness sakes don't get sick, you might draw one of them as your
nurse......hehehehehe. Another scary thought. Just think what I put in their heads.
^^^^Hehehehehe, This place is more fun than a cat in a room full of rocking chairs.
Go to go, catch you folks on the flip side.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
