TaraElla: Welcome to the TaraElla Report, where I chat with my friends about cultural and political issues. All of us are individuals who are simply looking for more freedom. I believe that it is only through amplifying the conversations of everyday individuals that we can cut through the nonsense and bring back freedom.
Today I continue my conversation with Allison, my independent conservative friend for whom strong families is the top social and political priority. In the last episode, we established that the priorities of Tea Party style political conservatives and family-minded social conservatives are now divergent, now that the main threat to strong families is in fact everyday economic stress, and Tea Party style conservatives had no credible answer to this challenge. In the previous episode we looked at the positive reception of Bernie Sanders among some conservatives, now we will talk about Andrew Yang and his policies. Much has been said about Andrew Yang's strong support among some conservatives, and there have indeed been articles and videos talking about the so-called Conservative Case for Andrew Yang. However, such articles have been more about economic conservatism, and what's still missing is a look at Yang's policies from the family values perspective.
Allison: As I said before, I think right now the top political priority should be to help struggling families get by. Economic stress caused by an ever increasing cost of living is hurting families, and this is contributing to more family breakdowns and a weaker social fabric. In modern times, family breakdowns disproportionally happen in poorer areas, which tells us the importance of economic factors in maintaining strong families. If every mom and dad had an extra $1000 to spend each month, it would go a long way towards easing the stress. Also, just knowing that there will be an unconditional $2000 for each family every month will give many struggling families a sense of security. That's why I think Andrew Yang's Freedom Dividend could be the most pro-family policy we have seen in a generation.
TaraElla: I totally agree. As human beings, we are evolved to care deeply about our families. From the perspective of the average person, if there isn't even the ability to provide adequately for your family, there is basically no effective freedom to do anything else at all. No fancy ideological spinning can obscure this truth. I believe this is part of the reason why the Freedom Dividend is called that: it takes care of the basic needs of working families so individuals can have the freedom to do what they want to do, whether this be to start their own business or to decide that mom should stay home and look after the kids for several years, something that most families used to be able to do back in the 1950s.
Allison: It's good that you mentioned the point about stay-at-home moms. If most mothers could choose to stay at home back in the 1950s, why shouldn't they be able to choose that now? I am disappointed that political conservatives never seem to ask this question. I mean, many women want to opt for a more traditional lifestyle, it's becoming a thing now, but it seems only the relatively rich can do that in practice. On this point, we have actually regressed a lot in the past 60 years! It just isn't right that families with two working parents nowadays are effectively doing worse than families with only one working parent back in the 1950s. This is what I hope the Freedom Dividend can fix. I mean, as conservatives, we don't agree with endless handouts or stifling private enterprise, but a modest $2000 per family per month isn't going anywhere near that.
Besides the Freedom Dividend, I am also encouraged by the fact that Yang seems to have a particular commitment towards strengthening families, something I haven't seen from anyone else in the past ten years. For example, one of his policies is to provide for marriage counselling. It's something that won't cost a lot, but would likely save many families from breakdown every year. He is also concerned about falling birth rates and rising suicide rates, issues that pro-family people deeply care about but currently don't have much of a platform to raise.
TaraElla: Andrew Yang is perhaps one of the very few politicians who even have a particular policy to support families, and this is very inspiring to see. My long standing view is that freedom doesn't exist in a vacuum, and strong families are the best defense against the creep of authoritarianism. We first learn our individuality and our independence in the context of growing up in individual families, which separates us from the collective mass that is society. I mean, if we were raised in large communes instead, we would probably all end up without individuality, because we would have learned to be cogs in a much bigger system from a young age. This is why, we who believe in individual liberty, must do everything to support strong families.
That's all for today. I'll be back next time with another conversation. Subscribe if you want to follow our story. The transcripts are available on my website, and my Medium profile. And remember to resist the hive mind and stay individualistic. The world depends on it.
Doing sociology and philosophy in real time by looking at developments in contemporary Western politics and culture, from a Moral Libertarian perspective. My mission is to stop the authoritarian 'populist' right and the cultural-systemist left from destroying the West.
Labels
The Conservative Case for Andrew Yang and the Freedom Dividend (UBI) | #YangGang | TaraElla Report S4 E7
-
We need to argue for utilitarianism and organicism against the anti-freedom ideologies One thing that I have repeatedly emphasized and explo...
-
Attempts to remake society to satisfy theoretical needs are often anti-utilitarian Welcome to The Fault In The Left, a series where I will e...
-
It's very bad news indeed for the future of freedom in the West Welcome back to The Fault in the Right. Today, I'm going to talk abo...