How do Liberals/Progressives justify their approach?
Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 7 months ago to Politics
Given the decay of once great cities like Detroit, Chicago, Los Angeles, etc. how can the Liberals/Progressives justify their policies?
And how can the residents there not reject those failed policies?
And how can the residents there not reject those failed policies?
Liberals never justify themselves because that would imply a foundational set of moral codes or beliefs that transcend the minute it takes them to come to a decision. Liberals lust for power above all things and they see any means as justification to obtain it regardless of how fleeting, irrational, or truly selfish (worldly definition here) their behavior is. They also refuse to look at the past and all the failures of policy because in their hubris they believe that they are more brilliant, more charismatic, and more modern than all the other leaders who have pursued the same failed policies. They persist because they believe that no matter who else has tried it - even themselves - that it can't go wrong again.
It is my contention that there is no such thing as a reasonable, rational liberal for this reason. ;)
I do think that they have a moral code. It goes something like "because I feel for my fellow man, anything that I do, regardless of the consequences, must be acceptable - because I only do it because I care."
You're absolutely right about the hubris. Look at O - never ran anything of significance, gets elected to the most powerful position in the entire world, and cocoons' himself inside a coterie of sycophants. He refuses to get any objective data or evidence to make an informed decision, because he thinks he's the smartest around.
"I genuinely care for America, for all her people. The problem is that half the country want what they call 'freedom' and what I call 'anarchy.' They feel I'm ruining the country. Not so! I'm testing the moral fiber of this nation, seeing how deeply they will sacrifice for their fellow Americans!"
I really don't think liberals really do anything to help other people. They use "helping" as a smokescreen. If they really wanted to help people, they would look at the results of their actions and change course. Of course now _I_ am the one ascribing rationalism to liberals!
No, what I really think happens is that liberals value the acquisition of power above all else. This then becomes the central factor in all decision-making. If they think it will increase their power, they will choose it. I think they also don't have much regard for long-term vs short-term power and tend to choose the short-term options - whether out of impatience or simple risk-avoidance I can't definitively say.
Power is the mechanism by which they can enact their "feelings."
The biggest problem is that those of us of the libertarian streak have no interest in politics, as it does not appeal to us to want to "be in charge" of others. Thus, we don't seek political office and end up with the types of politicians that we have.
Some want power. Some want green environments, some want to clean up plastic, some want to save the world from sin. Does not really matter what the thing they lust for is, it only matters that they want it no matter what the costs, no matter who pays the costs and no matter what else results from attempting to get that thing.
Reason, Logic and even the idea of cause and consequence cannot exist in a mind that can see only an end goal they want, they lust after, that clouds their vision from anything other than that <insert power, wealth, environment, religion, science, freedom here>. They are simply people with blinders on to anything other than what they want at this moment, which may be power or nearly anything else.
I've stopped being shocked every time I listen to AM 760 (which most of you can probably hear all the way to dang near the Rockies at night). They regularly interview the Mayor of Detroit, the Police Chief, Wayne County Executive, etc...
All of them have said on more than one occasion, things you'd NEVER hear a Federal Officeholding Democrat say, things like:
"We can't increase taxes any more on businesses"
"We need to lower taxes on businesses to encourage them to stay"
"Private Firearm ownership is a good means to deter crime"
"We simply can't pay our government workers that much money"
"The union pensions are unaffordable, we have to negotiate a change to them"
etc...
Despite what they say, they don't do what they say. They merely ask for more money to be funneled to them from the state and federal governments.
At least the New Yorkers occasionally come to their senses. They've gone off the deep end recently, and this may well be their death knell, only time will tell.
Decimus Junius Juvenal
AD c. 50- c. 130
But after some period of time, wouldn't you think that people would just get tired of living in squalor with no hope or prospect of a better life? How can whole swaths of society just give up?
The original quote is by Juvenal, about a century and a half after it was already taking place.
http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/24528998/po...
We as a party were anti-civil rights at one time.
The backlash from that caused many to leave the party, some to turn face and march in the civil rights formation (like Byrd) and others saw it as a chance to use the same party to make minorities dependent and weak.
We turned into a party fighting for equal rights, religious freedom, freedom of the press, freedom of expression, and free speech.
Then the Socialist Party of America stated to their international counterparts that they could not turn America. That didn't go down well with them. Forced to return to the task, they declared they would use the Democratic Party as their face to America (public knowledge, easy to look up) and would crash the economy so it could be turned to Socialism.
They have and now they're trying to do the second thing.
In some ways, doing a John Galt is exactly what they want. The more of you that leave, the easier it is for them to achieve their goals.
But what is the alternative?
I have no clue. I despise socialism and communism (helps to keep the economic and political forms clear) and watch how daily more young Democrats sell the ethics we held so dearly for a short time (freedom and equality) cheaply for a socialist agenda.
Republican goals are important to the country.
The original Democratic goals were as well. We wanted what was best for the country, both groups, but we had different priorities.
Now we're facing the Democratic Socialists of America in Democratic Party clothing (check them out if you want a story - more than half of our representatives on my side of the aisle are members) leading us down...well, you can see that for yourselves.
How do they justify them? Equality. It's a short step from the idea of equal opportunity to equality in all ways at the sacrifice of justice and responsibility.
They simply see it as a temporary evil before they work out the problems.
The "rich" and those who take their place are expendable for the greater good.
We have raised a generation of "You OWE me" children. They haven't matured yet and we still coddle them.
An exception? Hostess. Go look up their closure and reopening sans unions.
Tough Love.
Good luck, all. Wish I'd been more successful holding my party back from it's slide. Still trying.
Into quite another category -- an idiot. Then you have the leadership that preys on the idiots.
I don't think gov't policy makes business grow or not grow or makes people poor or not poor. There's a whole industry dedicated to convincing people that good policies "create jobs", but it's not true.
Here's another one - how many people have been cut to under 30 hours/week due to the healthcare law? How many others have lost their previously provided healthcare due to the law?
What about the EPA? How about the FDA/USDA and all the other alphabet soup gov't agencies?
In my narrow corner of the economy, mainly engineers, if some activity doesn't make financial sense b/c of healthcare costs it won't make sense even if someone magically made that go away. It might be different in high-volume mfg. In my corner of the world, though, it's absurd. PPACA actually improves labor mobility, although I believe it has no net pos nor neg effect on business.
I have never known anyone in trouble with the EPA or other regulators. They could cause huge problems. I just haven't encountered yet. If I ever start buying solder paste by the barrel, I'll probably change my tune.
Of all of these, the compliance costs and trade costs are the most volatile, punitive, and subject to the next lobbyist. If you want a prime example of compliance costs and their effect on the economy, search the internet for any article talking about the costs of implementing the Affordable Care Act. You will see polls there of existing businesses that have flat out stated that because of the barriers raised by ACA, they will not be hiring full-time employees and will not be able to capitalize on growing demand for their products.
Governmental barriers to entry are very real and can have a very long reach and should not be taken for granted.