Isn't liberalism a predictable consequence of corrupt conservatism?
A genuine Conservative is supposed uphold the value of the free market, and yet few have anything to say about the governments involvement with corporate powers that have nothing to do with the consumer voting confidence of the people. Few speak of political greed and none about empathy. This directly affects the social order perpetuating apathy and mistrust. Many young people turn to liberalism because (and though most liberal leaders are just as greedy) they are being forced into identifying and associating capitalism with human greed due to conservative hostility, fear and con-art of words that seem to destroy their meaning almost on purpose. If the people in power really wanted what is best for this nation, they would work towards the kind of bipartisanship that doesn't assume human beings as units or members of groups and actively demonstrates individual liberty and the idea that conservatism and progressivism are both equal political imperatives and that joining any group that blindly promotes one over the other without a well defined issue to which a conservative or progressive decision is to be made is to miss the point entirely. I'd also like to know what the benefits of poverty are.. What good could come of it? Im no socialist but wouldn't it be grand if we as Americans grew up and realized our innate power and ability to cure and emancipate the people of conflict or war? That we have within us the potential to rehuminize by setting a new standard of living to which all humans are entitled. No man, woman or child deserves funding simply for having a lack of it. However when you realize money is nothing but units on a computer screen and that there are people dying and leading terrible lives all because of a lack of units on a computer screen it kind of changes the whole idea of what otto be done. Capitalism is in no way, shape or form obligated to praise gluttony or the putting of materialism and social status before humanity. If only we realized how little we would have to give up just so people can eat, have a comfortable home and have THE MEANS of supporting and educating themselves. Once all people in this freedom loving nation called The United States of America are given these basic necessities, we would see a drastic decrease in violence, crime, social apathy, greed, etc and a major surge in education, understanding, cooperation, compassion, determination and excellence. We can change how our neighbors around the world look at us (from the middle east all the way to china) just by making an effort to carpet bomb starved countries with the ridiculous (AND I DO MEAN RIDICULOUS) amount of food we waste rather bombing countries we feel home "terrorists" which are only "terrorists" because we disrespect and undermine them by setting up bases on land that doesn't belong to us. (as we have for decades now) 3000 children die of starvation each HOUR! If only they were constantly on our doorsteps crying in the excruciating pain they are experiencing even at this very moment. Perhaps then the media along with the American people would lighten up and give more than 0% of its attention to this issue. However we must focus on the problem here at home first... Foreign Policy Domestic Policy Monetary Policy EDUCATION Individual and Political Duty Government Purposes Commercial Purposes Mediocrity The forsaking of Social and Economic Freedom Social Conditioning and Propaganda The list goes on... rEVOLution anyone?
Politics - 7 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Few conservatives had anything to saw about federal involvement in corporatations?! Strange but tell me again why the GOP lost power this recent time? I would have sworn it was due to them supporting a bailout....at least from the conservative side.
2 :
Yep, you got it; that pendulum swung pretty hard in '08 due to the RINO's. It's gonna swing back even harder in the fall of 2010, because Obama ran as a centrist, but he's really a hard leftist. The American people don't like feeling duped. Here's something to help with your bumper sticker, if you need it: http://sites.google.com/site/vetobama/ Who are these starving children? How is it that our kids are starving and yet we also have a historically unparalleled childhood obesity problem (among, INTERESTINGLY, our nation's poor)? So Michelle Obama's "beat childhood obesity" issue is just hot air? Are you a utopian liberal? Do you earn your own money yet? What color is the sky in your world?
3 :
Liberalism is the product of a dysfunctional educational system, grounded more in ideology than education. Need proof ? How many high school seniors can count back change, or even work out a simple math problem, without a calculator.? You may seek revolution, but be careful what you wish for. You may have it, yet.
4 :
I read the first couple of sentences, before I realized this was crap. If it was a trick question, Sorry.
5 :
The whole system is perverted by a far right lunatic fringe TV network. Agit-prop 24/7, Beck and Hannity are so obviously deranged, that O'Really and Huckabee seem almost reasonable.
6 :
I'm a registered Republican, a traditional conservative and a classical liberal. I believe Hobbes advanced the cause of the common man well in his day of feudal society in Europe. I believe Rousseau and Locke continued later by breaking the bonds of monarchy, then Humboldt and Mill (and to some extent Kant) further described the problem and the solution. Individual rights are in essence, the only thing that matters. Government should be small and of limited scope, primarily for protection. Aside from government, people were pretty much equal in the 17th and 18th Centuries, and much of the 19th Century as well. Today's Neo-liberals are all to happy to jump into bed with government and their circle of power-elites, granting them far to much authority over our lives. There is another power center that exists today, one that didn't exist in the Feudal Western World. As governments amass strength and concentrate power, corporations amass great wealth and hold ownership of the industrialized world. Were John Stuart Mill alive today, he would be arguing for the dismemberment of our corporations as vehemently as he would our governments. Neo-conservatives seem to be quite at home with the corporate titans. The problem is, power and money seem to be getting along together just fine while the citizen, the 99% of us, are left out in the cold. I can define the problem, but I don't know the answer. :( Oligarchic Corporatism seems to be the order of the day. The political problem is easier than the economic problem because the people still retain some small measure of control through elections. Even the Supreme Court is working against us when it comes to corporations. They may now speak right up to election day with however much money they care to spend. Here's what we might do: First, repeal the 17th Amendment, the one where we took the power away from our state governments to appoint Senators, and give that power back to them. We the people are sheep as a group and we will vote for whichever senatorial candidate our corporations tell us to vote for. This country was born on the premise of "one man, one vote" and we each have a representative in the House that is supposed to fight for us individually. The "one man, three votes" 17th Amendment gives too much power to whomever can afford to persuade us. Second, enact legislation that removes the liability limitations afforded officers, board members and major stock holders of corporations who want to do business in the United States. Let's see how many run-away Toyotas we see on the road after that legislation passes. In fact, with legislation like that on the books, we might actually be able to believe corporations when they say they are being good citizens. I recognize that you are looking for a redistribution of wealth, but I don't see how to make that happen in the real world. No brand of Socialism affords self-determination short of Anarchy, and a share of the wealth is meaningless under a tyrannical regime. Society as we know it would have to cease to exist and in the process tens or maybe hundreds of millions would die from hunger, exposure and preventable disease. It would take a generation or two, maybe longer to build another society and capital structure. And who's to say if it will be better? Stalin and Mao both tried. How did it work out for them? EDIT Here's a thought. What if employees elected corporate management instead of shareholders? With liability exposure, that might be the best long term solution to the corporate monstrocities.
7 :
Any particular reason you published this spam/rant here, or did we just end up the beneficiary of your off-topic fecal matter of the male bovine? Troll.
