Boston Herald

What true conservati­ves should care most about

- By tylEr CowEn Tyler Cowen is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. He is a professor of economics at George Mason University and writes for the blog Marginal Revolution.

If you are a true conservati­ve — and I use the term not as Ted Cruz might, but in its literal sense, as in conserving what is of value in the modern world — then you should be obsessed with three threats to the most vital parts of our civilizati­onal heritage, all of which are coming to the fore: war, pandemic and environmen­tal catastroph­e.

These three events have frequently caused or contribute­d to the collapse or decline of great civilizati­ons of the past. After being seriously weakened by pandemics and environmen­tal problems, the Roman Empire was taken over by barbarian tribes. The Aztecs were conquered by the Spanish, who had superior weapons and also brought disease. The decline of the Mayans likely was rooted in water and deforestat­ion problems.

I think of true conservati­sm as most of all the desire to learn from history. So let us take those lessons to heart.

The odds are that nuclear weapons will not be used in the war in Ukraine. Still, there is some chance of a major escalation, or the deployment of other weapons of mass destructio­n. That chance is difficult to estimate, but it’s not crazy to put it at or above 1%. A desperate Vladimir Putin might well resort to a strategy of escalation, if only as a misguided attempt to de-escalate.

Here is the dilemma: If you play that “1% chance of massive destructio­n” repeatedly over decades, sooner or later an actual escalation is going to erupt. The cumulative probabilit­ies of a major nuclear exchange are not actually low, even if the probabilit­y is low in any single war.

A true conservati­sm thus ought to make limiting the probabilit­y of a nuclear exchange its top priority. Such an emphasis would not itself solve the problem, of course. Nonetheles­s, any observer of American political debate for the last 20 years or more will admit that the issue is nowhere close to a major emphasis.

This brand of conservati­sm does not necessaril­y insist on higher levels of defense spending, as conservati­ves pushed for in the 1980s. But it does suggest that alliances, military readiness and flexibilit­y are major policy issues.

If more defense spending is called for, that should be the federal government’s No. 1 priority. While President Joe Biden so far has done a reasonable job executing America’s Ukraine policy, he has not made these issues top priorities, nor have the Republican or Democratic parties. When was the last time a major politician gave a speech about how long the military procuremen­t cycle has become, relative to the pace of technologi­cal change?

The relevance of pandemics is all too obvious. Still, Congress is dragging its heels on a $10 billion pandemic assistance bill, and snags remain.

Even after more than 1 million excess deaths during this pandemic, Americans are still not taking pandemic risk seriously. Is America so much better prepared for the next time around?

Finally, a true conservati­sm would prioritize the most important environmen­tal problems. To use a specific example: It should not take seven years to get permits for an offshore wind farm. Just accept the reality that wind farms will involve some modest environmen­tal problems of their own and get on with building them.

Unfortunat­ely, even as environmen­tal regulation­s proliferat­e in the U.S., there is an unwillingn­ess to push through a carbon tax or make nuclear power plants easier to build.

The main task of a revitalize­d conservati­sm should be to restore America’s moral seriousnes­s on these issues. At the moment, neither political party is doing that.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States