If only more people thought about issues, instead of feeling, we'd see more of this (from Whitespace by Tom White, shamelessly stolen from The Real Mensch):
What will it take to make people realize that everyone must be held fully responsible for their own actions, no-one else's, if we are to have a truly free society? Or is it that they don't want a free society?
Jon Bond, director of the Colorado State Shooting Association, recently wrote something (paraphrasing George Will) that I found interesting:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>The fundamental difference between the political right and left is in the way they define freedom. To the right, freedom means liberty, freedom from oppression, excessive government and regulation. To the left, freedom means not needing anything you don't have - freedom from need. The result is that the right seeks to limit and/or reduce government while the left wants to expand government to provide for an ever-expanding list of needs.
In fact, the extreme left buys into the age old lie of communism and fascism which is that you are better off trading liberty for security, and they are working full time with a sympathetic administration and a sympathetic media to accomplish just that.[/quote]
Sounds about right to me. As absurd as it is, some people just don't want to be responsible for their own lives.
Another way of looking at our current political situation (again, thanks to Mr. Bond) is through the eyes of Alexander Tytler, a professor during the late 1700's, who was not so optimisting about the fate of our then-young nation:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the people discover they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.[/quote]
I'd say America as a nation discovered that they could "vote themselves largesse" with FDR and the New Deal in the 1930's. Unfortunately, it has only spiraled down from there.
Tytler also ruminated on "great civilizations," which I think ours has been, and still is at this time:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from dependence back againd into bondage.[/quote]
Assuming Tytler is correct, are we yet at apathy? I believe we are. Now, can we stop the progression to dependency? Or can we only delay it? Are we truly fighting a losing battle?
What will it take to make people realize that everyone must be held fully responsible for their own actions, no-one else's, if we are to have a truly free society? Or is it that they don't want a free society?
Jon Bond, director of the Colorado State Shooting Association, recently wrote something (paraphrasing George Will) that I found interesting:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>The fundamental difference between the political right and left is in the way they define freedom. To the right, freedom means liberty, freedom from oppression, excessive government and regulation. To the left, freedom means not needing anything you don't have - freedom from need. The result is that the right seeks to limit and/or reduce government while the left wants to expand government to provide for an ever-expanding list of needs.
In fact, the extreme left buys into the age old lie of communism and fascism which is that you are better off trading liberty for security, and they are working full time with a sympathetic administration and a sympathetic media to accomplish just that.[/quote]
Sounds about right to me. As absurd as it is, some people just don't want to be responsible for their own lives.
Another way of looking at our current political situation (again, thanks to Mr. Bond) is through the eyes of Alexander Tytler, a professor during the late 1700's, who was not so optimisting about the fate of our then-young nation:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the people discover they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.[/quote]
I'd say America as a nation discovered that they could "vote themselves largesse" with FDR and the New Deal in the 1930's. Unfortunately, it has only spiraled down from there.
Tytler also ruminated on "great civilizations," which I think ours has been, and still is at this time:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from dependence back againd into bondage.[/quote]
Assuming Tytler is correct, are we yet at apathy? I believe we are. Now, can we stop the progression to dependency? Or can we only delay it? Are we truly fighting a losing battle?