Why anti-government tea partiers still love government entitlements
Yes, the irony is rich. It also has progressive roots.


Many conservatives and tea party types talk a good game about shrinking government and cutting spending, but also react virulently when an entitlement they cherish, like Social Security and Medicare, is threatened. Progressives love to mock the tea partiers who demand, "Get your government hands off of my Medicare!" It gets laughs. And sure, fair enough.
But this conservative attitude isn't just rank hypocrisy. It also gets at some key aspects of the way our political life is set up.
So for starters: What's the conservative worldview? The writer Reihan Salam hit the nail on the head when he described the view of conservative activists as "reap what you sow economics." It's not just an issue of distribution or GDP, it's also one of fairness: If you work hard and succeed, you should enjoy the results of that work — if you don't, the system needs to push you to shape up.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
This worldview is why President Obama's "you didn't build that" comments caused such a furor on the right — by seeming to deny what conservatives view as a key foundation of a prosperous and just society.
Everyone subscribes to some version of "reap what you sow economics." That's what capitalism is based on, and by now pretty much everyone understands that at least some capitalism is required for people not to starve to death. Almost no conservative disagrees with the idea of using tax money to build roads, and almost no progressive wants to nationalize Google and send Larry Page to a reeducation farm.
And this "reap what you sow" philosophy is actually compatible with a welfare state. To use celebrated slogans, "helping those who can't help themselves" and giving "a hand up, not a hand out" involves government safety net programs — if you can't sow, you can't reap. Conservatives are fine with such programs, so long as they are tailored to edge cases and designed to help beneficiaries become self-reliant.
But doesn't that mean conservatives should reject universal middle-class entitlements like Social Security and Medicare?
The answer is yes, mostly. But a simple yes misses one of the central facts of the American political economy, one that exposes progressive, and not conservative, hypocrisy: Middle-class entitlements are not individual savings schemes, even though they are often portrayed that way. This leads to some key confusion about these programs. This confusion is by design. From the New Deal to the Great Society era, the progressive architects of the American welfare state knew that the best way to ensure the political viability of these programs was to portray them as savings schemes.
The most common piece of rhetoric used to defend these programs is that once you had "paid into" them throughout your working life, you are entitled to the benefits you paid for. You are entitled to reap what you have sown.
But this is not how Social Security actually works. What you sow goes into a giant black hole. What you reap comes out of that same black hole, but it doesn't have all that much to do with what goes in, at least not directly. Instead of reaping your own crops, you reap your children's crops, but that is artfully concealed.
If the true nature of these programs was widely understood, I really believe that conservatives would rebel against them en masse, as would a sizeable number of the rest of the American public. Fortunately for the progressive project, the deception still holds.
So there you go. This conservative "get your government hands off my Medicare" attitude is deeply misguided, yes. But in a way, that points to progressive hypocrisy, too. Because the whole liberal entitlement system is built on misunderstanding.
Still, I guess progressives ought to be entitled to laugh — after all, they pulled off the most successful con job in American politics.
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry is a writer and fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. His writing has appeared at Forbes, The Atlantic, First Things, Commentary Magazine, The Daily Beast, The Federalist, Quartz, and other places. He lives in Paris with his beloved wife and daughter.
-
Anne Hillerman's 6 favorite books with Native characters
Feature The author recommends works by Ramona Emerson, Craig Johnson, and more
-
How Zohran Mamdani's NYC mayoral run will change the Democratic Party
Talking Points The candidate poses a challenge to the party's 'dinosaur wing'
-
Book reviews: '1861: The Lost Peace' and 'Murderland: Crime and Bloodlust in the Time of Serial Killers'
Feature How America tried to avoid the Civil War and the link between lead pollution and serial killers
-
The JFK files: the truth at last?
In The Spotlight More than 64,000 previously classified documents relating the 1963 assassination of John F. Kennedy have been released by the Trump administration
-
'Seriously, not literally': how should the world take Donald Trump?
Today's big question White House rhetoric and reality look likely to become increasingly blurred
-
Will Trump's 'madman' strategy pay off?
Today's Big Question Incoming US president likes to seem unpredictable but, this time round, world leaders could be wise to his playbook
-
Democrats vs. Republicans: who are the billionaires backing?
The Explainer Younger tech titans join 'boys' club throwing money and support' behind President Trump, while older plutocrats quietly rebuke new administration
-
US election: where things stand with one week to go
The Explainer Harris' lead in the polls has been narrowing in Trump's favour, but her campaign remains 'cautiously optimistic'
-
Is Trump okay?
Today's Big Question Former president's mental fitness and alleged cognitive decline firmly back in the spotlight after 'bizarre' town hall event
-
The life and times of Kamala Harris
The Explainer The vice-president is narrowly leading the race to become the next US president. How did she get to where she is now?
-
Will 'weirdly civil' VP debate move dial in US election?
Today's Big Question 'Diametrically opposed' candidates showed 'a lot of commonality' on some issues, but offered competing visions for America's future and democracy