An intellectual conservative

Yes, you read that right. There are folks out there who are smart and who subscribe to conservative ideology. Newt Gingrich is one of them.

However, they'll likely never get elected, because their ideas are bat-crap crazy (case in point is this one, suggesting child labor laws are holding poor kids down). To summarize Newt:

"You're going to see from me extraordinarily radical proposals to fundamentally change the culture of poverty in America and give people a chance to rise very rapidly."

You see, just because you're smart doesn't mean your ideas are smart. People come up with theories on all kinds of things, and many of them turn out wrong. When it comes to politics (and economics, which are closely related), it's hard to prove who's right and who's wrong, because we almost never get a pure version of any ideology (darn democracies).

But ideas like the ones Newt often presents sound pretty crazy, and common folk get that (libertarian Ron Paul is in this same category). That's why the "intellectuals" of either party have a hard time getting elected. Maybe it's for the best, even though I'd agree with some of the radical proposals from the left.

On this specific idea from Newt, I believe that he believes allowing 12-year-olds to work would help them. But I also believe that he has convinced himself of that because it feeds his bigger goal: removing all barriers to allow the haves (in this case, businesses) to have their way with everything. The path to this justification: many conservatives believe the only thing keeping that 12-year-old have-not from becoming a have is the welfare state.

Me, I believe that have-not just isn't that smart, probably. You'll get very little mamby-pamby stuff from this progressive. I believe that progressivism is just the more pragmatic way to deal with the world.

In the end, all conservative thought wants to get us closer to anarchy, while progressive thought moves us closer to socialism. The best way no doubt lies somewhere in the middle.