| | We are trying to figure out how to form welfare states (democratic socialism) that work best for everyone.
I am part of the group "everyone". A welfare state of any kind does not work for me. There is no "one size fits all". We are all not the same. We don't all have the same needs, wants and desires.
In a democratic socialist state there is no alternative for someone like me.
In a republic with constitutionally protected individual rights that also protects the free market, there is an alternative for you. If you choose to live in a socialistic sub-society, you can do that. You can all pool your money and negotiate with some healthcare provider, you can run your own schools that teach socialist philosophies, you can provide free homes and food to the homeless. If there are enough people in your socialist society, you can even gather in one state and you can eventually have enough influence in that state to make it a democratic socialist state within the framework of the federal government that supports your individual right to do this.
This was the beauty of the plan for the United States. The federal government was to have a very simple role. The states were to remain autonomous so that they could accommodate the diversity and varied needs. wants and desires of people who came from many different backgrounds.
You want to live in a society that thinks about the tribe first. You have that option. It's been done many times in the U.S. (though they all seem to disappear after awhile).
The problem is that you believe that, in order for your democratic socialist utopia to succeed, you need to force people to believe in and participate in your system.
I have no desire to force you to take any other action than to not force me to do something. I don't want your money. I don't want your house. I don't want your free healthcare. I don't want anything from anybody that I have not earned.
Your utopia requires forcing people who do not believe in your views to participate in a system that is abhorrent to them. In fact, your utopia cannot exist without the compliance of everyone, especially the people who produce wealth and who would naturally not want to give it up. So force is a deep rooted foundation of your beliefs.
My utopia requires that I not force people who do not believe in my views to do anything other than leave me alone. My utopia doesn't require the compliance of others to exist. My utopia has individuals being self sufficient and responsible for their actions. If I don't work, I will suffer the consequences of my actions (or inactions). It's nobody's fault but my own.
If you can't recognize and acknowledge these basic difference in philosophy, you clearly haven't thought through your belief system.
Your dream state has its roots in force and coercion. It may be prettied up with jargon about taking care of the poor and disadvantaged. What was that woman's name who quoted her buddy Mao? The one who agrees that power comes from the barrel of a gun? You don't want the people to have guns. You want the government to have the guns. If, as Mao and Obama's friend Anita Dunn said, power comes from the barrel of a gun and you don't want the people to have guns, what does that tell you about where you think the power should reside?
On the other hand, I want people, everybody to have guns. I want people to have the power.
Who really cares about the little guy? hint hint, it ain't the liberal/progressive/democratic socialists.
Message 29157881 |
|
