Friday, May 15, 2009

The Struggle

Recently it was suggested to me that it was a bit amusing to see right-wing, conservative capitalists create a fraction between those who support central banking and those who don’t; those who support big government and government intervention for their own benefit, and those who don’t support big government at all. The thought is that the crony capitalism we see dominating the US right now is simply an inevitable result of free markets. Free markets allow successful people to gain too much power and it is completely unavoidable that they go to government for protection from their own poor performance and government willingly protects them. Free-markets allow this corruption to flourish and further support of such an ideology will only continue to lead to much pain of the same pain, supposedly. The left argue that proper government control, regulations, and transparency will prevent this.

The fraction that is trying to break itself off, trying to differentiate itself from the cronies, aggressively make the argument that the corruption we see is the result of too much government. They say that the Federal Reserve banking system is used as a tool by the elite to maintain their power and wealth, therefore robbing the rest of the country; that the Federal Reserve is used to regulate interest rates under the guise of proper government control while instigating these business cycles and bubbles we suffer through. Of course, the left-wing establishment would never acknowledge that the Federal Reserve is a problem as it allows for heavy government spending without the transparency of its true cost that would be provided by an honest currency as government would be forced to tax the people more for every dollar is spends, as opposed to printing it.

This is why I find it ironic to see the same fractioning occur on the left. While the free-marketeers I associate myself with label the current Republican establishment for being too pro-big government and too pro-big spending (therefore left-wing), there is a fraction of the left that is starting to attack Obama and the Democratic establishment for being too pro-business, pro-war, and overly lax on government transparency, supporting civil liberties, and left-wing social issues such as abortion. They blame Obama, his administration, and the leaders of the Democratic Party for being right-wing and too Republican.
Isn’t it odd that no matter who is in power, the grass-roots of each political wing always complain that the actions of their respected establishment representatives embody all that they hate of the opposing political establishment? People are waking up and realizing this as times become more dire and government intervention hits home.

The fact is, no matter who is in power the government continues to be poor on that which is most important:

- Neither side is fiscally responsible
- Both sides are pro-war, pro-empire
- Both sides are protecting those who tortured and allowed torture
- Both are poor in civil liberties
- Both lie, constantly

It is the lying that bothers me the most. It is the lying that allows those in power to get away with everything that they do that they know their constituents would not support if they told the truth.

The roots of both the left and the right in the US do not support most of policies pursued by the United States government, but they are always apologetic for their respective establishment when they are in power. The reality is that the apologies need to stop. The pain won’t cease, the criminals leading this mob will not be brought to justice, rationality will not be brought to government until the roots of the left and the right put their ideological beliefs to the side and come together to focus on those ideals that are most important during these most precarious times.

My point being, for example, while the left believes in a woman’s right to choose and the right believes life should be protected from conception forward, none of that will matter one bit if the government establishments are allowed to destroy the middle-classes of the West and further impoverish our Civilization with their backward economic policies.

This is not a left versus right battle. This is a struggle which has been an institution of humanity for our entire history. This is a struggle between those people who wish to have power over others and those people who wish to be free.

8 comments:

Sheldon Furlong said...

we the people want to ride the fence on most issues thus our politics beomes dumbed down to medocrity to mirror "we the people".

Sheldon Furlong said...

nicely wrtten by the way. This cpould have been an editorial in any newspaper!

Josh said...

The point is that as we move forward the people will not be able to afford to ride the fence.

And thank you.

Christopher said...

Sorry, freedom means jobs shipped to China. Sorry, freedom means employers being able to fire at will, hence crushing union drives. Sorry, freedom means rights, which means a woman has a right to control her body. Sorry, freedom doesn't mean you can kill people, because freedom has limits, limits imposed by the will of the body politic. Sorry, Freedom will not be accepted by thinking people wihtout argument, as a means unto itself. Sorry, Freedom is not necessarily a positive value. Sorry, people are not free to own slaves. Sorry, people are not free to pay slave wages. Sorry, people are not free to be racist, sexist, homophobic fuckheads simply because they own a business. Sorry, and finally, people are not free to ingore the facts the want to ignore. That sort of freedom is known as the freedom to lie to oneself, and is inherently negative.

Christopher said...

There is no such thing as "The Government". If want to boot the current establishment out, you must taken action and organize or demonstrate them out of office. Until this happens, the libertarians will continue to sound like the crazy boneheads they are.

Josh said...

"because freedom has limits, limits imposed by the will of the body politic"

Well, says you. In reality, freedom is limited only by the rights of others.

"people are not free to own slaves"

Because this would impose on the rights on the slaves. . .

"people are not free to be racist, sexist, homophobic fuckheads simply because they own a business"

Well, unfortunately, they are. Society is not perfect.

Christopher said...

"Well, says you. In reality, freedom is limited only by the rights of others."

Nope, says history. In reality, i.e. history, the "rights" of others have been trampled upon by others over and over and over again.. Ignoring this fact is tantamount to lying to oneself to make reality fit one's ideology.

"Because this would impose on the rights on the slaves. . ."

Yes, which means that freedom is limited for a reason. We don't just allow freedoms willy-nilly, without thought.

"Well, unfortunately, they are. Society is not perfect."

Nope. We deny freedom to those who think they have the freedom to kill or main other people. Homophobia, sexism, and racism are no different and the freedom to act upon these vile ideas should be limited rationally.

Josh said...

"Nope, says history. In reality, i.e. history, the "rights" of others have been trampled upon by others over and over and over again.."

Which is why government is needed to protect individual freedom. . .

"Nope. We deny freedom to those who think they have the freedom to kill or main other people. Homophobia, sexism, and racism are no different and the freedom to act upon these vile ideas should be limited rationally."

Only limited to the extent that these people do not infringe on the freedoms of other individuals.