I decided that, if push came to shove, I'd hold my nose and go with the socialists.
Perhaps you may change your mind after a while.
I have had the same moments in which I push myself to make a decision and for the most part, I arrive at your conclusion... but then I think... wait, let me go over this again, and then I cannot bring me to accept such decision.
Why?
Because in both alternatives, these "philosophies" demand that you sell-out your mind to nothing more than slavery and sacrifice of the individual for a questionable "common good". In the case of the religio-wackos it is marginally worse since they are asking you to do so, under the premise that there is this imaginary man in the sky --who NO ONE has actually brought forward any hard evidence of his existence, (aside from the individual "come to Jesus" moment --which it does not count in the factual world, of course **and please Jesus wackos, do not come and tell me of your own extra-terrestrial abduction by the Jesus brigade, so spare me the details**).
Actually, the idea of the "common good” would be more "palatable", only if before committing resources to such venture, they would ask first: "Who is going to pay"? And why? [Basic common sense in the structure of the question and an honest answer, are, of course, assumed -gg]
Then, the idea of giving up (willingly) the independence as an individual free-thinker for these ideologies... I simply cannot do it.
There was a time in which I was convinced that the Libertarian alternative was the only way to "accept" some form of government... but I have seen enough evidence that a Libertarian system will never succeed as the great majority (i.e.: the masses) would never be able to stomach it.
In general, men (and women) do NOT want to be free, they want to be SAFE.
That alone precludes any choice that would favor Laissez Faire, simply because there is a lot of RISK in having that freedom, risk that it is very real and it carries a lot of consequences, some of them not very nice.
But that is the real price of real freedom.
Unfortunately, we live in a world that it is simply not feasible, the possibility of certain consequences, is not something that the masses would be willing to accept. In this country, the land of the "free", a mentality based on "the government owes me" (and any rich corporation owes me even more) has been implanted to the point that they will simply not stomach the implied risks of a real Laissez Faire society.
At some point I was serious enough that I studied one of the several attempts at re-creating the new Hong Kong... in theory it almost became a reality, but once you begin to plug-in the needed realities of the mechanics as to how to co-exist in today's world... it simply does not work.
The only real alternative is to create, at the individual level, such environment. Even then, said environment will be under constant attack from all sides, since whatever system may be in question, it will feel threatened, they are all driven by ego-maniacs with tremendous thirst for power and ANY attempt by anyone to be independent of such power is a direct attack on their egomaniac drive for total control.
So what is my choice then... my course of action...
I suppose I am working on creating my own Laissez Faire environment, which of course, it will only work for me and my direct sphere of influence. It is possible and so I keep working on it.
So I approached the problem not by comparing outcomes but by comparing the likelihood of the outcomes. Right now the socialists are ebbing and the religionists are flowing. Thus there is less risk of contributing to a bad outcome in siding with the former.
I completely understand your approach, and it is a very smart one... I just cannot do the same. Personally, and perhaps this is due to seeing very closely the consequences of religious idiocy; I consider the extreme religious, far, far more dangerous. They are true evil in its purest form. Once in power, they will stop at nothing to get what they want.
Their mindset is based on "fear of god" and the immolation of your own spirit for some unknown and fluffy deity. NO different than the ancient (and blood thirsty) Aztecs; a love for god based on sacrifice. --How pathetic.
A band of fanatics that in spite of scientific evidence, they still think evolution is the product of rotten spaghetti on someone's mind and instead, they go for the "man in the sky charade".
Unfortunately, (for me), the socialists are a cancer that eventually destroy all innovation and incentive driven enterprise, for the betterment of.... well.... the dumb and dumber brigade.
They lower the standard to the lowest possible, making the idiots the heroes of society. --a still born philosophy.
Thanks, but no thanks. -g
I simply have no desire of being part of either mentality, which at times, they both make me sick.
Thanks for calling the question.
On the contrary, it is my pleasure and I appreciate that I was able to prompt interest in a very smart mind. ;~] |
