Imagine a table divided into two sections. One side is labeled Strong Federal Government, and the other Limited Federal Government. Now imagine that you have pieces of wood with different political goals engraved on them.
Here are what some of the pieces of wood read: “Constitutional amendment outlawing abortion,” “Constitutional amendment outlawing same-sex marriage,” and “Government vouchers for private and religious schools.”
Now take each piece of wood and carefully consider it in your mind. Is it a goal that would be more in line with a stronger federal government, or a more limited one?
If your understanding of politics is developed well enough, then you should have placed all of these on the side of the table representing a stronger Federal government. However, these political goals are those of the socially conservative right wing, which is supposedly in favor of a more limited Federal government.
At a purely political level, the main difference between the two Democratic and the Republican parties is that the former aims for and supports a large federal government, and the latter aims for and supports a smaller federal government. One philosophy is focused on the society, and the other is focused on the individual.
Therein lies the great confusion which disrupts the current political power structures.
Social conservatism and the Republican party are two concepts that have been wedded together in ignorance. Social conservatives stereotypically push for a federal government that will make constitutional amendments outlawing abortion, same-sex marriage, and vouchers for private and religious schools.
However, for a Republican candidate to make a political push for these goals would be playing false to the true goal of real conservatives: Individual liberty.
True Republicans do not oppose welfare, environmental protection, or gun control because they hate the poor, loathe nature, or seethe with homicidal rage. True Republicans oppose these political goals because they believe that they should be able to choose whether they, as individuals, want to donate money for the poor, protect the environment, or carry a gun.
Attempting to force the government to change the constitution for social issues, be they liberal or conservative, is not a Republican ideal. In fact, if one were to take a concentrated look at the supporters of the Democratic party and their goals, they would find that many of them fall more in line with Republican ideals. Same-sex marriage protection, legalization of marijuana, and abortion rights all ask for a limited federal government.
In this way, the Democrats are just as guilty of pandering to ideological minorities as the Republicans.
While the structures of power that back our legislators should be fluid, and able to adapt to the changing moralities of the segments of society that decide to support them, there is a responsibility of these parties to stay true to the basic political ideologies that supposedly define them. This is especially true when the wants of the constituents are so diametrically opposed to the goals of the party.
It is not necessarily the fault of the parties for garnering votes from people who are not in line with its ideology. After all, getting votes is what a political party is supposed to do. People who have specific moral goals should make more informed choices about which party is better equipped and more practiced in shaping the type of Federal government they want.