Can a Mormon be Conservative?

Can A Mormon be a Conservative?

In a recent article published by the Deseret News, Ralph Hancock, Professor of Political Science, Brigham Young University, examines whether one can be both a faithful, practicing, Latter-day Saint and politically liberal.  He concludes that it’s possible, but liberalism inherently leads one away from principles espoused by the church.

Being both of those things, a faithful Mormon and a card carrying liberal Democrat, it seemed like a fun exercise to turn the tables and examine the congruency between being a Mormon and a conservative.

As Hancock points out in his article, empirically the answer to this question is obvious: of course an individual can be a Mormon and a Conservative.  But a deeper look into the basic tenants of conservatism ought to yield a more conceptual answer.

The Capitalist Mentality

One of the most debated topics on capital hill is the ramification of allowing a “survival of the fittest” economic model to play out.  The left argues that a distribution of wealth is only fair, as it is unnecessary for such a small percentage of the populace to hold such a great deal of the country’s wealth — especially when a number of individuals don’t have enough to meet the basic necessities of life.

The First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles have not been silent on this issue.  In an 1875 declaration written under the pen of the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve Apostles we are taught,

One of the great evils with which our own country is menaced at the present time is the wonderful growth of wealth in the hands of a comparatively few individuals.  The very liberties for which our fathers contended so steadfastly and courageously, and which they bequeathed to us as a priceless legacy, are endangered by the monstrous power which this accumulation of wealth gives to a few individuals and a few powerful corporations.

It seems that this declaration paints conservatives into a tight corner with regard to their economic policy; at the very least there needs to be some sort of bridge to gap the principles of capital economics and wealth distribution.  The First Presidency goes on in the same document to issue a warning,

If this evil should not be checked, and measures not be taken to prevent the continued enormous growth of riches among the class already rich, and the painful increase of destitution and want among the poor, the nation is liable to be overtaken by disaster; for, according to history, such a tendency among nations once powerful was the sure precursor of ruin.

Of course it would be unfair to assume that just because one espouses capitalism they’re falling into the category of people the First Presidency is warning against, but one must be aware what the prophets have said and the implications of acting contrary to their counsel — no matter which political party one associates with.

Welfare