Stories At The Margin
columnist: Christopher Espinal

Topic: Conservatism
Being Hispanic, Poor, and Conservative

---

Self Congratulatory Babbling about the origins of my ideals.

---

by Christopher Espinal
(Conservative)
Monday, June 23, 2008

Very often my conservatism is questioned by my liberal friends, and not for reasons of empirical or logical inaccuracies. They have an interest in my conservative philosophy as a Puerto-Rican and Dominican American born in a poor part of Brooklyn, New York. There's no question that this eccentric collection of identities results in confusion with many of my peers.

I interpret this confusion as "Why doesn't Chris just follow the Latino way of thinking?" In general, I agree with the notion of conformity, as it creates efficiency in life when working with other individuals. You don't have to disagree on issues or get into needless debates that end nowhere. Thus, one can leave more time and energy for fun, fighting with people you actually don't like, or contributing to some effort. This inherent cultural and social efficiency in collectivist identity essentially brings people together, building a more social and cooperative system.

So what pushes me in a different direction? In general, I value ideas that work more than I value philosophical conformity. I, just like any other person in the Latino community, would like to see a time of prosperity for us such that we transcend patterns of incompetency and economic stagnation.

Common wisdom of today would assert that government has an ability to move people forward. Had this thought process actually produced positive changes, blacks would not be in the middle of the same debate for the past 40 years. Our Federal government provided all sorts of programs and unilateral opportunities to this community, including TANF assistance, but still no movement. Obviously, I concluded that these efforts of central planning on the black community provide no hope. However, I still have one option - lesser government.

Not only is this the remaining option, but it makes a lot of sense. For personal growth in human capital, individuals must learn how to build and maintain capital - not continue to accept charity at no price. If the price is zero this means there's no marginal cost, or an incentive to stop consumption of this free good. Every scarce good must have some price attached to limit consumption. Instead of taking advantage of freebies paid by other tax payers, an incentive for this individual to actually do something for themselves must be present. Don't make the costs of consuming freebies close to zero, rather, make the cost a lot higher by vastly reducing "assistance." This will give an incentive for blacks and Latinos to play a greater role in the private market.

Some people believe the notion that markets were never inclusive of blacks and Latinos. Supporters of Jim Crow intended to destroy security in the lives and capital of people of color. I recall from the Hernando de Soto's Mystery of Capital that functioning free market systems require institutions that protect capital and private property. People of color did not have access to this important aspect of free markets, thus it was oppressors that never included them in the free market system. Free markets don't discriminate as it possesses no human characteristics and abilities. If this is true free markets don't have an ability to choose between exclusivity and inclusivity on the basis of race.

Nowadays, the incentive to build and prosper no longer exists for blacks and Latinos. The government serves as their cushion, causing people of color to exclude themselves from private enterprise.

Does this mean that I believe all of the problems of the black and Latino communities are due to laziness? We should give attention to the fact that in general people have prejudices. The images of people of color in a predominately white run media aren't necessarily hard working individuals who run businesses and eat with fine families. I get different signals from commercials, TV shows, magazines and other forms of media - blacks running from police and short Latina women serving rich white folks in Manhattan. However, these inherent prejudices will not disappear if no progress is evident in the non-white communities.

As far as addressing white prejudice, should they be held accountable? Don't underestimate the difficulty of ridding oneself of prejudice. Their inherent racism along with their position of power in most enterprises surely perpetuates stereotypes. However, people must see whites as equally susceptible to external influences on their subconscious prejudices just as blacks and Latinos. Many argue that the situation of people of color harkens back to environment - one can argue the same for whites.

As stated before, there must be an incentive to get people of color more serious about exploiting the endless opportunities available in a free society. Let's not forget that key government institutions must conform to standards that will make these opportunities in the market place accessible to a wider range of people. This is another way for me to advocate deregulation in entrepreneurship by lowering start up costs and other disincentives in the front gates of the private market.

Tax rates and economics aren't the only things that push me towards a conservative philosophy. Conservatives or folks that advocate smaller government, in general believe that it's impossible to tinker with the economy in such a way that we move people in a direction we desire. In other words we know and understand the fact that we aren't smart enough to control and improve the lives of other people. You will always hear about experts or professionals that intend to put their ideas to work through government policy. You also hear about programs designed by experts that never achieve goals. They should just admit that they don't know everything in the world and leave people to follow their own intuition and "utility preferences."

Furthermore, objectivity is at the center of conservatism. You can easily argue conservatism, or the classical liberal ideology, is a form of liberalism with a large dose of consequential habits. We believe in government - but government that works. In Friedmanesque wording - live up to the evidence of your failed institutions!

There you go!

Did you like this article?
If you did, Thumb It!
8 thumbs so far

2008 Christopher Espinal, all rights reserved.
Published: Monday, June 23, 2008
Last modified: Thursday, June 26, 2008

The views expressed in this article are those of Christopher Espinal only and do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Christopher Espinal is solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.

Report violation by Christopher Espinal of Nolan Chart LLC's terms of use policy.