In the 2000s, compassionate conservatism morphed into an acceptance of governmental centralism combined with a desire to make welfare more effective by working with rather than against religious bodies. Given early personnel and legislative decisions, plus Washington pressures to use power rather than relinquish it, plus the back-burnering of domestic policy after 9/11, the 1990s understanding was doomed. Compassionate conservatism was like a poorly rooted plant that sprang up quickly and died.

About once a month I get a letter from a WORLD reader asking me what happened to what became known as “compassionate conservatism.” Here’s a quick summary:

Compassionate conservatism in the 1990s was a decentralizing theory of how to promote the general welfare while cutting governmental welfare. It was never popular among Rand-based rather than Bible-based conservatives, and some viewed the term an insult to conservatism, which they saw as intrinsically compassionate. I had used that term but more often had spoken about “effective compassion,” defining that as a way of helping people move out of poverty rather than sustaining them in poverty.

Read More

[Editor’s note: the original URL (link) referenced in this article is no longer valid, so the link has been removed.]