Maximizing freedom for private appetites

George Will on conservatism and libertarianism—and this, in 1981:

Many conservatives  insist that America's great problem is just that government is so strong it is stifling freedom. These people call themselves "libertarian conservatives"—a label a bit like "promiscuous celibates." Real conservatism requires strong government.

The overriding aim of liberalism, properly understood, is the expansion of liberty. (American "liberals" long since became what Europeans call "social democrats," preoccupied with equality.) Conservatism, properly understood, rejects the idea of a single overriding aim.

Real conservatism tries to balance many competing values. Striking the proper balance often requires limits on liberty, and always requires resistance to libertarianism (the doctrine of maximizing freedom for private appetites) because libertarianism is a recipe for the dissolution of public authority, social and religious traditions, and other restraints needed to prevent license from replacing durable, disciplined liberty.

The truly conservative critique of contemporary American society is that there is too much freedom—for abortionists, pornographers, businessmen trading with the Soviet Union [Iran?], young men exempt from conscription, to cite just four examples. ...

Professor James Q. Wilson of Harvard wonders, reasonably, how conservatives can reconcile their idea that government should do less with the desire for the nation to play a more assertive role internationally, a role that may require, in addition to more weapons, more government activism in the management of international trade.