Mike Gerson, Liberals' Libertarianism Problem, and the GOP's Own Version of It

Former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson's recent Washington Post op-ed "The Eugenics Temptation" (to which Rick linked) on liberals' tension between their commitments to equality and their embrace of unfettered science drew this comment from Frank Pasquale, Seton Hall lawprof, over at Concurring Opinions.  Prof. Pasquale agrees that liberals have the problem but adds:

However, Gerson ought to also admit the "right"'s partial responsibility for driving the appeal of such arms races [i.e. toward "designer babies" and such]. Libertarianism is as much an aspect of the Republican as the Democratic party, and its tendency to reject all arguments for regulation is probably a stronger political force than the left's alleged rejection of a "necessarily transcendent basis of human equality." The "left" itself is diverse, and one need only read the work of Michael Perry, or basic documents in Catholic social thought, to see a robust program of social solidarity wedded to an ideal of equality grounded in natural law.

Well ... in fact, Gerson's most recent Post op-ed, and apparently his new book Heroic Conservatism, focus on the Republican Party's internal divide between the vision of libertarianism and the vision of empowering the poor -- the latter of which Gerson identifies with Catholic social thought.  (HT: Jim Wallis at God's Politics Blog)  From a Post story yesterday about the book:

For Michael Gerson, the pattern became discouragingly familiar. A proposal to help the poor or sick would be presented at a White House meeting, but Vice President Cheney's office or the budget team or some other skeptical officials would shoot it down. Too expensive. Wrong priority.

By the time he left the White House as President Bush's senior adviser last year, Gerson by his own account had grown weary of the battle, becoming an irritable colleague disillusioned by the conventions of a political party and a government that seemed indifferent to the plight of the downtrodden.

(I suppose there are reasons to be skeptical if Gerson portrays himself as the white knight in all of this (see here) ... but the criticisms he raises nevertheless seems important and true, and he's not the first "compassionate conservative" to raise them (see the list in para. 3 of this post).)

In today's Post column, Gerson contrasts libertarianism and Catholic social thought as they compete in the Republican Party:

The difference between these visions is considerable. Various forms of libertarianism and anti-government conservatism share a belief that justice is defined by the imposition of impartial rules - free markets and the rule of law. If everyone is treated fairly and equally, the state has done its job. But Catholic social thought takes a large step beyond that view. While it affirms the principle of limited government - asserting the existence of a world of families, congregations and community institutions where government should rarely tread - it also asserts that the justice of society is measured by its treatment of the helpless and poor. And this creates a positive obligation to order society in a way that protects and benefits the powerless and suffering.

Tom B.