George Will: The Phrase "Values Voters" is "Arrogant" and "Insulting"

By: Lowell
Published On: 5/18/2006 6:44:10 AM

I don't often agree with George Will, but today is certainly one of those days.  Will, you see, is a conservative, but not of the social conservative stripe.  Instead, Will considers himself a libertarian, one of "the various flavors of conservatism."  And libertarian conservatives, according to will, are "wary of government attempts to nurture morality." 

In contrast, social conservatives believe that "unless government nurtures morality, liberty will perish."  Apparently, if you believe that government's role is to tell people what they should do in their bedrooms or their hospital rooms, you're a "values voter."  According to Will, this is "aggressively annoying" and worse:

This phrase diminishes our understanding of politics. It also is arrogant on the part of social conservatives and insulting to everyone else because it implies that only social conservatives vote to advance their values and everyone else votes to . . . well, it is unclear what they supposedly think they are doing with their ballots.

...The phrase "values voters," which has become ubiquitous, subtracts from social comity by suggesting that one group has cornered the market on moral seriousness.

Meanwhile, according to Will, "it is odder still that the media are cooperating with those conservatives."  Hey, wait a minute, I thought the media was supposedly "liberal."  What a joke.  Instead, according to Will, "by ratifying the social conservatives' monopoly of the label 'values voters,' the media are furthering the fiction that these voters are somehow more morally awake than others."  Does that sound liberal to you?

As far as "values voters" are concerned, I consider myself and everyone I know to be one.  Personally, I vote my values - economic fairness, environmental protection, fiscally sound economic policy, investment in education and health care, freedom from government intrusion into my personal life and the personal lives of my friends and family - every time I go to the polls.  What makes my values, or my vote, any less important than those of so-called "values voters?"  According to George Will, nothing at all.  On this point, I couldn't agree more with George.  Will wonders never cease?  Ha.

Comments



I wrote to Will about this... (Info_Tech_Guy - 5/18/2006 1:11:37 PM)
I have long resented the arrogance and gross simplicatioms made by the so-called “religious right”. Their claims of moral superiority rankled me as much as the corporatist domination of policy in the Republican Party.

I note that in the wake of th 2004 election many Democratic Party “leaders” were on record joining in the general stupidity that Bush owed his re-election to “values voters”.  And these same Democrats drew a sharp,  artificial, and erroneous distinction between “values” and economic/jobs/”pocket-book” issues. I wondered at their comments for some time and then I realised that they genuinely don’t have a clue either.

I find that progressive/liberal activists and voters do “get it”. They vote on values, know they vote on values and understand that there are economic issues which are also reflections of “values”. Why is it so difficult for Democratic Party leaders and members of the mainstream media to understand that more than religious rights social activists vote on values?

The fact that many on the Republican religious right are preoccupied with issues involving abortion, school prayer, Israel, and the expansion of church participation in social programs does not make them any better or more authentic “values voters” than those on the Left or among Libertarians. Frankly, the press focus is distorted and grants these social issue conservatives an undue press monopoly on “values”.