Which Philosophy Generates More Generosity—Liberalism or Conservatism?

Dr. Arthur Brooks, a political independent and esteemed economist specializing in public affairs, set out several years ago to figure out who are the more generous Americans—liberals, or conservatives.

His book, Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism, published in November of 2006, has been thrust back into the limelight by a recent column in which George Will, the nation’s preeminent intellectual conservative, exposes the hypocrisy of the outspoken left in Austin, Texas, and by extension, of the left in general. Austin is the South’s version of Berkeley, California and Madison, Wisconsin—a hotbed of liberalism, and, it seems, sanctimony.

The presumption is that liberals, the champions of the poor and downtrodden, are more generous while cold-hearted, individualistic conservatives are less so. Brooks’ thoroughly reseached book proves just the opposite: conservatives give a greater percentage of their incomes to charity, are more likely to volunteer in their communities, and even donate more of their blood than liberals.

The least charitable Americans? Welfare recipients. The working poor, who are little better off than their fellow citizens who live on the public dole, are among the most generous Americans, giving more as a percentage of their incomes than those in the middle class.

At the time of its release, the results of Brooks’ research were popularized by libertarian ABC investigative reporter John Stossel and detailed in the The Chronicle of Philanthropy and at beliefnet.com.

Why is Will bringing Brooks’ work up sixteen months after its release? For one thing, its findings have stood the test of time despite a strong desire by liberal academics to discredit it. For another, we’re in the middle of a presidential race highlighting the differences between the two philosophies that dominate American politics.

The fact of the matter is that liberals as a group are more generous with other people’s money than with their own. Their rhetoric isn’t always backed with action, with sacrifice. Their philosophy is sometimes, in practice at least, shallow and hollow. They too often pander to the welfare class that helps put and keep them in power, taking from others through taxation what they are less inclined to give of their own accord.

Conservatives, on the other hand, submit to high taxation that goes against their philosophy, and yet they tend to give more of what remains of their income and wealth than those responsible for that taxation.

On the whole, Americans, both left and right, are exceptionally generous people. The differences Brooks demonstrates don’t run that deep, but they do reveal a stubborn misconception.

Liberals in the media have succeeded in unfairly characterizing conservatives as cold and uncaring. That’s a stereotype that should be put to rest once and for all.

Newsprism