Opinion: “Happiness,” as we see it
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
Today’s piece of our series on American values may surprise readers who, when they consider their own happiness, think in terms of personal satisfaction. When we discuss the “pursuit of happiness,” we do so not in the sense of a hedonistic quest but rather in the pursuit of economic well-being. As the editorial notes, that represents an older and, to us at least, a sounder basis for considering happiness and the government’s role in protecting our ability to secure it. For us, John Locke gets the nod over Timothy Leary.
The proper role of the government in the pursuit of happiness is not always philosophically pure so much as it is deeply practical. As such, it can disappoint those who search for absolutes. Those who would hold the government responsible for actually delivering happiness must inevitably be disappointed to discover that no government, no matter how big or insistent, may guarantee that its citizens are happy. Workers’ paradises tend not to be.
Conversely, those who see no role at all for the government in protecting a people’s right to pursue their well-being ignore the proper place for the state in shaping the economy and interceding where interests collide. The abolition of government has its downsides, too.
We happily find ourselves in the practical center between those poles. There, the government trains workers and protects the livelihoods of retired women and men; it sets rules and anticipates blips in the economy that could have devastating effects. But, when it functions well, it does so without coddling or infantilizing those it serves; it recognizes, for instance, the benefits of free trade, as we note, “rather than pandering to those who feel threatened by the global marketplace.” That has ramifications for the tax code, the deficit and the future of social security, among other areas. Some candidates are talking about those topics, and we commend them, even if we don’t always agree with where they come out. To those who are trying to duck these tough questions, we hope to keep up the pressure from our end, and hope readers will join us.
Today’s editorial brings us close to the halfway point of what we’re setting out to do over these weeks — to lay down a reasonably cogent and coherent set of values that reflect our history and that we hope to apply to the campaign. As we turn into the backstretch, we do hope you’ll join us, as scores of you already have, by sharing your thoughts on these pieces with us and with each other.
Just follow the links.