The journey from there to here
Published on May 5, 2005 By Gideon MacLeish In Current Events

An interesting comment I found on the response to another blogger:

It is the government’s job to ensure that people have jobs and a place to live.

That is an excelent summation of the mindset of many of the left in America. And it is horrendously untrue. Add to that that it shows the hypocrisy of the left, yet again, in light of one of our more current controversies.

The argument from the left in the Terri Schiavo case centered heavily on Ms. Schiavo's inability to feed herself or provide her own self care. Because Ms. Schiavo was unable to do so, liberal pundits decreed, all sustenance must be withheld from her.

When that logic is applied to the situation of the poor in this country (expecting them to provide for themselves), the left quickly switches sides. The government, they demand, should create jobs even for the people unwilling to work for them, the government should provide housing for those unwilling to find their own.

The problem is, the government HAS no such liability. To add to that, neither do we have a MORAL responsibility to provide for people who are COMPLETELY unwilling to provide for themselves. Should food banks be required to deliver food, since some people don't want to get off their asses and go to the food banks? Should people be given a nominal job when all they're going to do is sit at a table staring at the wall?

I could take this argument further and argue that it's simply a matter of survival of the fittest, but that would assume that all leftists are Darwinists; experience has told me this is far from the case (although it's a compelling argument for those who ARE). I could further state that the "Protestant work ethic" does revolve around a standard of doing SOMETHING to provide for yourself, but that would equally assume that all leftists are Protestant Christians; again, experience refutes me on this, although again, the argument is equally compelling.

I WILL, however, state that individual responsibility is essential for individual freedoms. If we wish to have a socialist society where every need is provided by the government, we cannot have liberty. And if we are to have liberty, we must have individual responsibility. Benjamin Franklin said it well in an almost overquoted statement that "he who would trade a little liberty for a little security deserves and receives neither" (a paraphrase). Insisting that the government provide homes and jobs is a sacrifice of liberty for security. Sadly, for most of the American left, it is demanding the sacrifice come from OTHERS without sacrificing your own comforts.

We must eradicate the mindset that we are responsible for providing a living for others. Until we return to a nation of individual accountability and responsibility, we will all continue to suffer, and we will be weaker for it.


Comments (Page 3)
4 Pages1 2 3 4 
on May 05, 2005
He was an authoritarian who used the state to impose his ideals on those he thought didn't know any better, and crush the ideals of those who did. You know, like most Lefties...


That gets you a cookie!
on May 05, 2005
I am a little curious as to why all of the people who are honestly and truly interested in helping the poor don't just band together, start their own relief organization run with an absolute minimum overhead, and help the poor?

All of the time and energy wasted on trying to convince everyone that it's somehow the responsibility of the federal government to do it would be far better spent in actually getting it done.

I would be all for supporting such an organization if it could prove it's overhead was the bare minimum and that it's programs were feasible.

I guess it's easier to just talk about it.
on May 05, 2005
I think it's because everybody would want to do it their own way MasonM.

Guy,

YES you can fix a problem. With your VOTE! You can hassle your reps and senators into sponsoring rational legislation to stop the fleecing. If they dont budge, take steps to get rid of them! American way remember?

Baker,

National Socialism was a right wing philosophy. This is a subject that i have done a lot of research on because i have always thought that the name was extremely deceptive, and i wanted to find out why it ended up with a moniker like that. You know....It's like you righties! :: (sorry i had to do it)

Gid,

I'm aware of the origins of that poem. I just used it as a metaphor to describe the philosophies our country is based on.
on May 05, 2005

Guy,

YES you can fix a problem. With your VOTE! You can hassle your reps and senators into sponsoring rational legislation to stop the fleecing. If they dont budge, take steps to get rid of them! American way remember?

Damn!  You are refreshed and rejuvinated!  Excellant point!  And I try, but when frick and frack are 2 peas in a pod, not much voting will do.

And I do!  At least on the local level.  feds are harder but I do express my displeasure, but the sheep abide!

on May 05, 2005

National Socialism was a right wing philosophy. This is a subject that i have done a lot of research on because i have always thought that the name was extremely deceptive, and i wanted to find out why it ended up with a moniker like that. You know....It's like you righties! :: (sorry i had to do it)

Actually no, Hitler semi nationalized all businesses.  Hence the Socialism.  I wont go so far as to call him a marxist, but he learned the book well.

on May 05, 2005
No point, dr guy. Talking to socialists about socialism is like talking to creationists about evolution.

Instead of "I din't come frum no monkey" it is "We won't change into fascist states". No matter that the modern political "fossil record" proves them wrong 100% of the time. Look at the authoritarianism of whitebread socialists like France; even they are slowly succumbing to the temptation to oppress.

I just think lefties are more comfortable with some hovering doom-like force controling their lives. Rids them of all that nasty personal responsibility.
on May 05, 2005
Baker,

I'm no socialist. All i am suggesting is that we find a way to take care of our fellow americans, and i think that maybe we can fix the existing system to do so without further taxation. Nothing more. In fact if we look hard enough and stop the partisan bickering, maybe we could find a way to do it and REDUCE taxes! I don't know if anybody in DC has ever thought of that.


Maybe you should go back and read some of the articles on my blog and ask yourself again if i'm a socialist. But then again, you righties hang a name on something it's the gospel truth forever and ever.
on May 05, 2005
"National Socialism was a right wing philosophy. "


urm...

  • All citizens of the State shall be equal as regards rights and duties.
  • The activities of the individual may not clash with the interests of the whole, but must proceed within the frame of the community and be for the general good.
  • That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.
  • Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in life and property, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as a crime against the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits whether in assets or material.
  • We demand the nationalization of businesses which have been organized into cartels.
  • We demand that all the profits from wholesale trade shall be shared out.
  • We demand extensive development of provision for old age.
  • We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle-class, the immediate communalization of department stores which will be rented cheaply to small businessmen, and that preference shall be given to small businessmen for provision of supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.
  • We demand a land reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to confiscate from the owners without compensation any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.
    • Adolf Hitler: From the "25 point plan of the National Socialist German Workers Party"


Right? Nope. Left turn then straight on til insanity? More likely.
on May 05, 2005
I'm no socialist. All i am suggesting is that we find a way to take care of our fellow americans, and i think that maybe we can fix the existing system to do so without further taxation.


So what is wrong with hearing new solutions outside of the Governement?
on May 05, 2005
The argument from the left in the Terri Schiavo case centered heavily on Ms. Schiavo's inability to feed herself or provide her own self care


no...the real issue was whether the government can involve itself in one of the most personal decisions a person can make. if anything it proves the hypocrisy of those--right, left, up or down--who otherwise claim to oppose just such meddling in issues of much lesser magnitude.
on May 05, 2005
"no...the real issue was whether the government can involve itself in one of the most personal decisions a person can make."


mmm, well... open season on uncommunicative spouses, huh? Once, when we were lovers in Tibet, Kingbee told me that if he ever became overly pompus, I was to bash him in the head with a brick. Now, being overly pompus, he is unable to communicate this as he is already in the grips of morbid self-importance...

What's that? Killing someone is illegal??? You mean the government is responsible to protect people from being "put out of their misery?" on nothing but my word as an intimate confidant?

Nah, butt out, the pompus guy says it is none of your business...
on May 05, 2005
Once, when we were lovers in Tibet, Kingbee told me that if he ever became overly pompus, I was to bash him in the head with a brick. Now, being overly pompus, he is unable to communicate this as he is already in the grips of morbid self-importance...


those were truly the days were they not? everytime i hear the strains of 'hello dali' i'm transported back to lhasa.

unfortunately for my ego and your case, that cute lil pair of matching sherpa dwarves--who happened to have been privy to that pillowtalk promise so long ago and far away--perished recently, victims of a practical-joking lama who put crazyglue on their favorite prayerwheel.

i guess it wouldnt have mattered tho since smashing someone in the head with a brick--unlike requesting one not be maintained on life support--is expressly forbidden by law and thus releases contractor as well as contractee from any obligation.

a vastly different situation than that resulting from the day in sri lanka when a comely bakerstreet solicited from me a solemn pledge to right things should he ever seriously attempt to mix apples with oranges and pass them off on the reading public as huge orange and red grapes.
on May 05, 2005
Squint as hard as you can, but you can't make two apples look like an apple and an orange. If I bash you in the head, i deny your brain bloodflow. If I strangle the life out of you, I deny you air. If I pull your food tube, I starve you to death.

The point is, you are living aided by only the regular necessities; air, food, water. I remove one and kill you. If food is life support, and the court takes your word for it without question, then the handicapped all over America are fair game. Sad world.

I remember now why I left you there with that lama, that lama that was "just a friend". No matter, we'll always have Tibet...
on May 06, 2005
If food is life support, and the court takes your word for it without question, then the handicapped all over America are fair game. Sad world.


that being the case, all laws and customs which recognize the right of a spouse to assert his or her partner's wishes to decline life support should be repealed, rejected and disregarded in the absence of a signed and duly witnessed document executed by the incompetent person just prior to the onset of a medical emergency.

otherwise, how can we be sure the person didnt have a change of heart?

what happened in florida didnt set any precedent. dozens of not hundreds of people are removed from articial means of sustaining life every day--possibly even that many in a single large state. unless the evil main stream media is engaged in a huge coverup, there haven't been any reports of widespread involuntary spousal euthenasia...yet.

if one really wanted to get rid of a burdensome handicapped spouse, there are many other much easier ways to accomplish that. an overdose of iv potassium is pretty much undetectable, for example.

that lama that was "just a friend". No matter, we'll always have Tibet...


yes we will. even tho that llama you left me with was no lama...it was our old confidante, al paca.
on May 06, 2005

mmm, well... open season on uncommunicative spouses, huh?

Damn!  My ex would not speak to me for years!  You mean I could have starved her to death and did not know it?  NOW you tell me!

4 Pages1 2 3 4