Often in the posts here on the blog you can see me attacking the G.O.P. and its insane stance on cultural issues and it hypocritical stances on fiscal issues. (If the GOP wins the White House, it is likely to retain the House of Representative and could take the Senate, in such a future plan on deficits in the federal budget as ‘not mattering’ once again.)
Some people interpret my criticisms of the GOP as a indicator that I must be a Liberal, and this is not the case. Of course many people can only see black and white when it comes to American politics and real Americans are always found solely on their own side. That is not a view I share, reality is full color, not black and white, but here are a few examples of why I cannot be a liberal.
First and foremost is the effect I call The Enlightened Man’s Burden.
A strain of thought very much alive on the left side of politics is that idea that people are incapable of running their own lives, left to their own decisions will make the wrong ones, and it is up to others, usually the government, to save them. A prime example of this is Mayor Bloomberg’s proposal to ban the sale of some drinks in containers greater than 16 ounces. Te ban effects only sugared drinks, so you could get milk shakes, and fruit drinks in any size, despite the fact that those drinks can and often do pack more calories per ounce that the soda that are targeted in this idiotic idea, but it is the principle underneath that is, to me, really offensive. I cannot be trusted to make my own choice in what I buy and consume, I must be nudged, guided, and rewarded into behaving the way brighter and smarter minds have decided is best for me. Now I despise these regs and laws even when they do not affect me. I have never and nor will I ever vote for a tax on cigarettes, or any other targeted population tax. The same goes for seatbelt and helmet laws. I always wear mine, and even in summer when I had a cycle I wore leathers, boots, and gloves along with my helmet, but I wanted to and I hate the idea that others decide my life for me.
With apologies to Number 6, my next point can best be summed up as “I am not a Category I am a Free Man.”
Another aspect of the left that rub me entirely the wrong way is the obsession with categories and classifications as the definitions of personhood. My life experience cannot be reduced to a check box of social classes and ethnicity. If you draw a Venn diagram of attributes for straight and gay people you would not have to set that do not touch, but rather great overlapping circles. I rejected, categorically, that rights exist in any manner other than individually. I have rights, you have rights, collectives do not have rights. In my philosophy there are not such things as women’s rights, gay rights, black rights, or any other collective noun-ing that produce rights. Any right I have, you have and it doesn’t matter at all your gender, race, or boinking preferences. You even have a right to be an ass. I remember once in one of those hypothetical discussions from my youth we battered around the idea of a magic button that could erase racism from all people, should it be pushed? I say no. A person has a right to be hold bigoted, idiotic ideas, they are limited in their actions, but not their thoughts.
A Clockwork Orange has no Juice.
This, of course, is a reference to the classic novel and movie ‘A Clockwork Orange,’ where in the story a futuristic British Government uses conditioning to change the behavior of a sociopathic little prick Alex. However it doesn’t make Alex good or nice, he’s still a prick just one now with an internal monkey giving him migraines if he does something to trigger them. In current American law, fully supported on the left, is the idea of hate crimes. That if someone is assaulted, it is one level of crime, but if they are assaulted because of a protected category, say race or sexual orientation, then it is a worse crime with heavier punishments. Punishing people for what they say, or even think, will not make them better people. Worse yet it makes justice different for different people. If I am beset upon my thugs and beaten it is not as bad if someone else is, my injuries and my violation are less important that another’s. Justice must be the same, or it is not justice.
You’ve got too much money, I’ll take that.
I truly am offended by the concept of progressive taxation. I dislike anything that through the power of government treats people differently and that includes taxes. It is the opposite of equality for the government to tax one person at 18%, another person at 25% and yet another at 35%. I favor the idea that all people, if you have an income tax, pay the exact same rate on all sources of income. (This is where the right loses me, their desire to let millions get away with 0% tax because it comes from capital and labor.)
So I’ll never bet at home on the left, though I can be forced to vote for the left on occasion. (Such as the last election.)
Ah yes, the nightmare of Florida, where Republicans run wild and spend spend spend! Deficit is their middle name!
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/deficit-to-surplus-understanding-floridas-budgeting-process/1187229
Contrast that to the true blue-state paradise of Illinois, home of The One! Where Democrats govern with care and concern.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505245_162-57458651/auditor-total-illinois-deficit-nears-$44-billion/
Brad, you’re wrong. Since Reagan, every time GOP held all of the executive and legislative branches of the gov. they have ignored deficits and focused on their agenda-du-jour. They will ignore deficits and go after basic human needs like decent health care, particularly undoing birth control equity and as much of abortion access as they can get away with, throwing the social conservatives a bone while they undermine whatever else they can get away with that is good about this country. I’m living it in Florida.
Bob’s points:
The Enlightened Man’s Burden – with you on this one. The laws you mentioned have nothing to do with that, however. They are attempts to pacify the insurance industry. Helmet laws and seat belt laws are put in place because the insurance industries threaten a state with high premiums unless they “do something” about the high cost of paying out on the greater expense of these injuries. The stupid soda cup law is the SSDD (related to health insurance and obesity – notice how the gov. is SO INTERESTED in obesity now that it is costing them something?). I can’t think how this will make any difference when so many places offer bottomless drinks, although you will burn a miniscule amount of additional calories since you have to walk up for your refill more often. Go figure. Personally, even though there would be great pain for many people, I think folks who engage in some of those stupid behaviors should be allowed to do them so that they take themselves out of the gene pool before they increase the stupidity in this country. (These laws for kids are a good idea. Kids should not have to die because their parents are stupid.) PS This whole category reminds me of “Demolition Man” ’cause I might just WANT cheesey fries!!
I am not a Category I am a Free Man. – I hear you, I respect you, but as someone IN a protected class, I have to tell you that approaching equity would not have happened without laws to guarantee it. I don’t mean ERA – that issue is dead and will never be revived. I mean Title IX. Title IX forced public schools to create fiscal equity for women and without it many, many girls and young women simply would not have the same access to education that boys and young men do because men’s athletics create and excitement that women’s athletics never does. I don’t know why this is so, but it is. I’m not demanding equity in professional sports! That is private and not gov. funded. BUT in state sponsored schools and colleges there needs to be some attempt. Title IX guaranteed it and thousands of girls and women have benefited and have improved the country because of it. Then let’s look at rape law and domestic violence. Yes, this is wrong REGARDLESS of the gender of the victim – but women were never taken seriously until laws were put into place that specifically protected them. I deeply hope for a perfect possible future where such laws, including hate crime laws, about which you make very valid points, are no longer necessary but we aren’t there yet.
A Clockwork Orange has no Juice You are right about the story in the film, of course, but the story is an oversimplification of the power of behavior modification AND the film, made from the American release of the book at that time, left out the critical 21st chapter – which ties together the theme of the book which explores change and maturation. Regarding the first part – while you can not “Think yourself right”, behavioral change can change cognitive internal constructs. In other words, once the behavior is changed, he will become a nicer person over time – the violent thoughts will decrease in frequency and the violent acts will reduce to zero. This was the point of the experiment in the book, to change the person by changing the behavior. Do we actually care what our neighbors THINK about doing? No, we care about what they actually do. Someone who behaves properly but is secretly thinking, “I hate you all and would like to destroy you in the most painful ways possible.” will never even be a blip on the radar if they don’t act on those thoughts. Regarding the second part, honestly, Anthony Burgess had a point when he wrote about the young having incredible energy and no direction, and then as we mature we have less energy but we direct it more effectively. (This is not an exact quote.) Working at a high school, Freshmen are the WORST!!! They are one step above cannibals!! They lie, don’t confirm to dress code, and are in almost all things uncivilized!! Believe it or not, in a mere four years (3.5, really) they change completely. By the time they are leaving us as seniors and post-grads, they have direction and a lot less energy but because that energy is now focused they have become people you actually want around. (To misquote Indiana Jones’ dad – they get interesting and then they leave!) How does all of this relate to law? Law must be balanced and fair and it is not a lesser crime if you’ve behaved badly and are now a victim. Liberals who change laws based on that mindset need to re-think. You are right about law but wrong about “A Clockwork Orange”.
You’ve got too much money, I’ll take that. Yep, you have a point but a flat tax rate isn’t fair either. I personally think we need to completely end and do away with all the old tax laws and start over. Neither party will go along with this because neither party really wants to solve this problem because they know there is no way to make everyone happy. We should not tax our lowest wage earners to starvation. We should not allow our highest earners to pay nothing BUT neither should they be tax in such a way that it is a demotivator to greater earnings (Art Linkletter spoke in an interview about being in a 90% tax bracket. Yes, he state that he only got to keep $100,000 out of every $1,000,000 that he made. I would call THAT obscene taxation!!) As for the middle class, they should not be taxed into poverty nor should they have to make up for the deficits in the tax roles created by those with the money to figure out a way around paying. How DO you write laws to address all of this. Both political parties are in somebodies pocket and WON’T fix the problem,
You may be right, but I remain skeptical. Three quick data points:
1) Voting on bills that have zero chance of becoming laws, I think, has very little predictive value for how they will act when the votes are for things that will become laws.
2) A number of Republicans are now making noises about retaining portions of the ACA that are popular, like patching the ‘donut hole’ in Medicare Part D without retaining the funding to to pay for it.
3) The Republicans are now trying to break their deal on sequestration. They agreed with the Democrats to a panel to try and find long term solutions to our financial woes, and put in triggers, very painful triggers to both sides for it that panel failed. The Republicans now want to have the Democrats suffer their penalties and escape the ones aims at their sacred cows. This is hardly a party that can be taken seriously.
” (If the GOP wins the White House, it is likely to retain the House of Representative and could take the Senate, in such a future plan on deficits in the federal budget as ‘not mattering’ once again.)”
Oh really? I don’t think the Republican Party of 2012 is the same as the party of 2006, the last time they held power in all three branches of the Federal government.
“The House Republicans have spent the past two years taking tough votes on entitlement reform, preparing themselves for an ambitious offensive should 2012 deliver the opportunity to cast those same votes and have them count. The Senate Democrats, on the other hand, have failed to even pass a budget: There is no Democratic equivalent of Paul Ryan’s fiscal blueprint, no Democratic plan to swallow hard and raise middle class taxes the way Republicans look poised to swallow hard and overhaul Medicare. Indeed, there’s no liberal agenda to speak of at the moment, beyond a resounding “no!” to whatever conservatism intends to do.”
http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/06/no-recall/