Michael Tucker brought up some interesting points in his recent commentary, (Nov. 18. “Conservatives’ symbolism, scapegoating divides nation”).

What is most interesting is the continuing ignorance of what is actually going on in our political and economic world. This ignorance fuels the Occupy movement and is the main reason that movement lacks focus and defined purpose. This ignorance is the oxygen for current class warfare and the reason that each side self- righteously resents the other.

Tucker talks about the problems of “unbridled capitalism,” specifically under George W. Bush. Where does this “unbridled” capitalism exist? It certainly does not exist in the United States and certainly not in our own state of Maine.

Occupy Wall Street and commentators like Tucker focus continually on the predatory nature of capitalism and universal greed associated with the profit motive. If they would focus on legitimate incidents of corporate crime and lack of ethics, they would find allies among a majority of conservatives and certainly in the Tea Party movement. Instead they insist on fanning the flames of class warfare — on Main Street as well as Wall Street.

There were crimes committed on Wall Street, or at least severe breaches of ethics. It would be hard to argue that cronyism did not play a role in fostering this culture of exploitative behavior.

The unholy alliance of big business and government, particularly on a federal level pushes the boundaries of ethics to the breaking point. However, rather than providing an example of the evils of “unbridled” capitalism; these machinations demonstrate the importance of restoring authentic free market capitalism and reducing government intrusion into business.

Anticipating the typical response, yes — there is a place for government in the marketplace. It is the role of government as we’ve defined it in our society to give us the mechanism to create and enforce contracts and to prevent us from infringing on the rights of others. It was never intended that government, particularly on a federal level, would determine which business would succeed and fail and provide favorable conditions for certain individuals to prosper while others would be kept out of the game.

From TARP bailouts to federal green energy investments, the government is continually tinkering with the free market. The government regulates insurance not to simply assure that you are receiving what the insurance company promises in their contract, but to dictate who will be covered and how. The government routinely confiscates private property from private citizens and reassigns it to private developers under the guise of eminent domain.

Unbridled capitalism is not the problem; the problem is the bridle. Free trade and capitalism provide the only workable system by which any individual can fully control and benefit from the value of one’s own talents, abilities and labor.

Tucker promotes the class warfare argument by alleging conspiratorial rhetoric fostered by conservatives. Again I ask: Where? I can properly be labeled a conservative because I work to conserve the original principles of individual freedom and liberty envisioned by our founders. Most of the conservative people I know fall into this category.

We don’t want to see people suffer and we don’t consider everyone who is down on their luck to be lazy, whether they’re minorities or not. The only immigrants we take issue with are those who are here illegally — and most of us blame the government for that problem, not the undocumented person who is trying to better his or her life by whatever means necessary.

What we do know, and what I know from personal experience, is that the only way to escape poverty is through hard work and the development of marketable talents and abilities. It is only the hardest working among us who create the resources to take care of others, including “those people” Tucker talks about.

Of course if you are a genuinely lazy underachiever, or insist that I owe you something simply because I’m willing to work harder than you, then no — I don’t want a nickel of my hard-earned going to subsidize your complacency or ignorance.

I would like to see Tucker’s theory put to a legitimate test. Let’s have five years of “unbridled capitalism” free from any government interference. Let’s see how life would be without the government subsidizing high-fructose corn syrup, ethanol and bankrupt solar panel manufacturers.

Let’s see what happens when big business is allowed to fail in a Darwinian fashion as should happen in the natural cycle of destruction that assures free enterprise.

Let’s try a few years where government doesn’t tax production, the root cause and currency of nearly all government favoritism, but rather we finance our federal government through a fair and transparent tax on what we each consume, individual and corporation alike.

Tucker and others with that mindset seem to envision a world in which a small band of evil capitalists eventually gains control of every aspect of personal life. In this world most of us would be reduced to the economic and social status that Tucker ascribes to “those people.”

Only free capitalism places the trust squarely in the hands of those of us who are willing to work, produce and share the fruits of our labor as we see fit, which is more often than not, generously. Tucker seems to prefer that we trust in a benevolent government that will decide an appropriate level of fairness and equanimity for each of us.

That experiment has been tried many times and has always failed.

JIM BOUCHARD lives in Brunswick.