* Originally Published in revista 22 collection ' Fuzionismul: an experiment in doctrinaire of modern discourse '.
Grover Norquist is President of Americans for Tax Foundation's ' Reform '.
United States modern conservative movement, often called "mark Reagan republicanism", it's a vital blend of radical individualism and respect for tradition. This mix is more easily accomplished than in Europe. American tradition, our so-called "nationalism" is a claim from a radical movement consisting in a riot caused by excessive taxation, revolt that has dressed and shape our war of independence under British tutelage. American history, our tradition, embodies the classical liberalism of the Europeans. Americans may be at the same time radical traditionalists and individualists. This is because our tradition is not defined by a religion or race or of belonging to a tribe, as happens in many of the Nations of the world, but our commitment towards individual liberty.
Some distinguished at the base of the coalition that brought him to power on Ronald Reagan's three pillars: social conservatism, economic freedom and a strong national defense. I think this characterization has created confusion and is not able to explain the distribution of votes and the real reason that the Reagan coalition has lasted over the years.
The best way to understand how and why the modern conservative movement can coalesce diverse groups of individuals is the recognition that all members have the Reagan Coalition and wanted only one thing from the federal Government for whatever theme they determine the vote: they ask you simply to be left alone.
Faithful people whose main concern is the practice of religion and educating children in the religion of the parents want the State to leave them in peace. Do not ask for subsidies from the State for their churches or to force others to bow to their gods. That's why Evangelical Protestants, conservative Catholics, Orthodox Jews, Muslims and Mormons can vote for the candidate with light heart and the party that promises to leave each alone.
The owners of the weapons, a major United States electoral segment, will just have to be left in peace to enjoy the rights guaranteed by the second amendment. Do not ask for subsidies nor demand that every public school to surrender after a manual titled "Heather has two mommies" (a children's book about a girl by two lesbian mothers increased. b. tr.).
Owners of small businesses are not going to state that let enterprises alone. They want less taxes and fewer regulations. Tax payers will simply lower taxes. Owners will have their property rights. All these voters are interested in the economic aspects are going to be left in peace.
The movement which wants a limited Government is not to be confused with anarchy or with opposition to the idea of Government. A Government that compel compliance with contracts, bank robbers and punish criminals and hinders Canadian to cross the border illegally enhances freedom. It was not until when Government exceeds these powers destroys individual freedom.
Even those Americans who vote with the foreign policy are motivated by the same desire to be left alone. The Bush administration may want to create an empire, but such policy has not managed to attract votes, as they learned in 2006 and 2008. During the cold war, when the Soviet Union threatens world freedom, there was a strong movement in support of a national engineer able to put Soviet colonialism Geoffrey. The aim of the movement was not spending money on for inarmarii sake: after the collapse of the Soviet Union, defense budgets in the United States fell from 6 per cent of GDP to 3 per cent of GDP.
In essence, there is no conflict between the Conservatives and labour of different religions who want to be allowed to practice their religion and business people of different types who want to be left alone to make money and create wealth. Maybe they have different values or priorities, but from State asking the same thing: "Leave us in peace.".
Translation of Tudor Galvez
