GTILL at ASNTSU.ASN.NET
Tue Jul 4 10:09:29 MDT 1995
In-Reply-To: dmccread AT MACH1.WLU.CA -- Mon, 3 Jul 1995 10:41:01 -0400
>Welcome. We all have a great deal of admiration for your father.
>Let me take a stab at your question. I believe that in most instances,
>the people on the left do not know economics for one thing. They start
>out with a valid desire to do "good" but it becomes misguided when they
>start to think that governments can do "good" for them. I believe the
>other aspect of the answer might lie in what I call the father knows best
>model - it implies that someone knows better than I what I should or
>ought to consume. I believe in the family compact model where decisions
>are made jointly and where there is respect for each individual as an
>individual with a right to make mistakes as well as do things right.
>It seems to me after having taught social workers a finance course in
>which they feel that with their training to do clinical assessment that
>they know what is best for welfare recipients, there are a lot of other
>occupations including doctors, teachers, and others who by and large have
>let their superior knowledge in a narrow field go to their heads and
>believe that they should make decisions for others. That means that when
>they look at government they see the mistakes which individuals make and
>want to impose their values on others - implying strong government with
>Does this seem plausible to the list? I believe it stems from that BUT it
>also stems from special interest groups being able to get what they want
>only through strong government overcoming the will of the people. I have
>seen this in the case of feminists, multicultural groups and even today
>anti-religionists. What do you think?
Its hard to come up with any explaination for why the social reformers
do what they do because they are riddled with hypocrosy. Hillery said
it herself in a speech last week, "do as I say, not as I do." I think
you are over complicating it. These people are not interested in really
helping people (apoligies to Rush, as he has already said this better than I)
but in increasing their own power base. They need people to be angry so
these angry people will vote against their opponents. The have nothing
to offer themselves for people to vote 'for.' What better than to exploit
class warfare, racism, homophobia, etc? The methodology is simple also.
Lie if you have to (and even if you don't) and anytime anyone on the left
is confronted with truth, loses and election, is caught with their hand
in the cookie jar, etc. cry foul by calling the accuser a racist, bigot,
homophobe, etc. Never, ever admit that people oppose you because of your
cockamamy, anti-freedom ideas but rather because of some 'ism.'
More information about the Rushtalk