Hot Air:
(I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you.)
Suppose I were born in a wealthy country of a minority family for which my father had absconded and my mother is subsisting as a welfare dependent. Further, suppose my health were poor, my body not naturally coordinated, and my IQ relatively low. Given such a situation, ask: What does God or life owe me? What does my family owe me? What does my country owe me? What should a civilized society provide for or owe me?
Well, it is not for me to judge whether God or life owe me anything. And, it does little good to mull about what my family may owe me. If my country’s laws afford a system for providing me with counsel, advocacy, governmental welfare and job training, so be it. Regardless, no one and no thing owes me “objective equality” --- for there is no such a thing as objective equality among things, such as persons, that are different.
Still, what SHOULD a modern civilized society provide?
Should not a civilized society provide a decent safety net, in order to avail at least some floor of opportunity for shelter, food, clothing, health care, education, job training, and inculcation of a sense of moral responsibility and empathetic appreciation for my civilization? And if I refuse to assimilate a sense of appreciation for my civilization, and refuse to discipline or apply myself towards trying to become self reliant or a contributing member of society, and refuse to learn to be a responsible parent myself, then what does my civilization owe to its other members, in respect of protecting them from me?
Concerning a decent safety net: Should not government exercise decent vision and care, so that taxes are applied responsibly, towards means that will likely lead to worthwhile ends, which will not so distort other laudable purposes as to make the governmental cure worse than the social disease to which it was addressed? Among those who plead for selfish interests and those who pander to them, how many give even the least consideration to the inevitably distorting effect of governmental involvement? When it comes to governmental regulation and largesse, how many take even the least responsible look at wider, long-term costs before leaping to toss the public’s treasury in support of parochial, short-term interests?
For those citizens who are at least minimally inclined to accept training on how to become contributing members of society, should not an enlightened civilization wish to provide a decent floor of support, in respect of shelter, food, clothing, health care, education, job training, and inculcation of a sense of moral responsibility and empathetic appreciation for civilization? How may a civilization recognize when its governmental intrusion has or will lead to DISTORTIONS and costs that exceed a point of reasonable return on efforts?
In other words, what sort of functions should best be entrusted to private enterprise, rather than be invaded by government?
****
Regarding “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help you,” see http://www.bbhq.com/rolegov.htm;
http://www.american-partisan.com/cols/2003/pike/qtr4/1017.htm;
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/8/8/83855/57328;
*****
Quote from John Dewey:
“… politics is the shadow cast on society by big business... Power today resides in control of the means of production, exchange, publicity, transportation and communication. Whoever owns them rules the life of the country, even if democratic forms remain. Business for private profit through private control of banking, land, industry reinforced by command of the press, press agents and other means of publicity and propaganda, that is the system of actual power, the source of coercion and control, and until it's unraveled we can't talk seriously about democracy and freedom.”
****
First Rule for Physicians of Governmental Change: First do no harm.
4 comments:
Can Obama Defend America?
Long before Bush invaded Iraq, was not Bin Laden already safely tucked away in Pakistan, in Tora Bora? So, what does Obama mean by Iraq as a distraction? Is Obama saying Bush should instead have invaded Pakistan?
Actually, neither Republicans nor Democrats are qualified or interested in providing long term defense of America. Rather, the controllers for both parties want to erase all borders, so that those inclined to the game of business can be unfettered, as they go about seeking to put everyone else under thumbs.
Even so, like Churchill, I am a long-term optimist. I think moral, middle class folks will eventually make intelligent common cause, leading us neither to the rape of socialism nor to the rape of unrestrained capitalism. Rather, we will progress towards a sensibly regulated form of capitalism.
Presently, however, Obama is a greater danger than McCain. Obama lacks any military experience by which to educate his muscular disposition, has only bookish appreciation of real world dangers, and has been schooled longer than any Madrassa to believe not in a Higher Will except as source for liberating salvation through government.
Regarding Governmental Distortion:
From http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Barry_Goldwater :
“... moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.” Barry Goldwater
Attributed: “For the past twenty-five years the apostles of the welfare state, some Republicans, some Democrat, have been busy transforming that stern old gentleman with the top hat, the cutaway coat, the red, white, and blue trousers, from a symbol of dignity and freedom and justice for all men, into a national wet nurse, dispensing a cockeyed kind of patent medicine labeled "something for nothing," passing out the soothing syrup and rattles and pacifiers for grateful votes on election day.”
....
“A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.” Gerald Ford
Unless you’re lead sled dog, the view is always the same:
From http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/01/opinion/01brooks.html?em&ex=1215144000&en=2326b635599ad84d&ei=5087%0A:
“The trends are pretty clear: rising economic sectors tend to favor Democrats while declining economic sectors are more likely to favor Republicans. The Democratic Party (not just Obama) has huge fund-raising advantages among people who work in electronics, communications, law and the catchall category of finance, insurance and real estate. Republicans have the advantage in agribusiness, oil and gas and transportation. Which set of sectors do you think are going to grow most quickly in this century’s service economy?
....
If the Democrats are elected, this highly educated class will have much more say over policy than during the campaign. Undecided voters sway campaigns, but in government, elites generally run things. Once the Republicans are vanquished, I wouldn’t hold your breath waiting for that capital gains tax hike or serious measures to expand unionization.”
Comment by Dlanor, at http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/obama_fear_and_the_security_fo.html:
Government Enforced Dhimminitude:
Presently, we have social competition among (a) traditional family values, (b) governmentally sponsored (political correct, secular, or sharia) values, and (c) anarchic (anything goes) “values.”
If social conservatives surrender on the issue of social values, the issue will not vanish. Rather, the issue will morph, to governmentally induced (often dictated) values.
Libertines are sorely misguided Pinocchio’s to expect that resisting family-based standards will further their “rights” to engage in “anything goes” behavior. And, Secular Humanists are misguided to expect that savaging Christianity will save them from Islamofascism.
No doubt, standards will change, but newly intrusive standards will simply and promptly fill any moral vacuum. Libertines are not unlike children, running from the embrace of their parents into the embrace of Big Government Intrusive Dictate.
After all, “it takes a village.” So, liberty-defilers (Leftists and fellow Jihadists) are urged, essentially, to “jihad in your face.” And Big Dictate knows best (at least, for the responsibility-surrendering, weak-minded, heavily-conditioned, and corrupt).
Bottom line: Will autonomous lovers of liberty wimp out, in surrender to secular Borg-dom and/or Dhimminitude?
Post a Comment