Why have things not gotten better under the liberals?
Perhaps, a better question is: When will the utopia, the brighter days, the more prosperous and harmonious times that were promised finally come?!
“Liberty. Equality. Fraternity.” High sounding words, yes. These were the cries in the French Revolution in the final decade of the 18th century. Today’s “liberals” are of the Left which has its roots in the left hand side (more radical faction) of the national assembly hall in Paris during the Revolution.
The below pic is of Nancy Pelosi, an infamous, long-time member of the US Congress from that most “progressive” of US cities, San Francisco.
Disclaimer: This blogger is not a Democrat nor a Republican, but is an independent with no political party affiliation. The 2 major political parties are corrupt and cannot be reformed. Thus, we need new parties in the US.
Here is the reality. Things do not get better under the policies and actions of the liberals in power because such policies and actions actually exacerbate existing problems and create new problems.
Consider these few examples.
Free markets do not work perfectly, but these work more efficiently and more effectively when government stays clear and does not by its actions distort market forces. We have tens of millions of citizens either unemployed, underemployed or withdrawn (out of despair) from the labor market. The valuable contributions these millions would have made if they were gainfully employed are lost forever to our economy and nation. That is the reality.
Similarly, the federal government, and to a lesser extent the individual states have been throwing money at poverty since the mid 1960s (LBJ’s “Great Society” and The War on Poverty). Ten trillion dollars later we still have poverty and actually by some measures it is worse now than 50 years ago. Better to have pursued policies that foster and encourage economic growth that produces economic opportunity so that individuals can lift themselves out of poverty by their own efforts (read: hard work). Such pro-growth policies require the government to get out of the way and reduce taxes and needless regulations.
As regards education, again with their characteristic simplistic thinking and lack of practical savvy, liberals say “more and better” when it comes to the schools. Throw more money at a problem and it will be solved. In reality, not every problem is caused by insufficient financial resources. Thus the “cure” is not always to be found in throwing more money at the problem (in this example, poor academic results). Perhaps, more accountability and higher standards for teachers and students would help – and these could be achieved without gargantuan sums of taxpayer money being spent. This thought does not occur to the big-government liberals. (If, on a graph, you plotted money spent in the US on education against student achievement in the past 50 years, you might be tempted to conclude that the increased spending on education (per student) has actually caused the declining level of achievement we have seen over the years.)
Instead of recognizing that government actions, schemes and interference are responsible for many societal problems getting worse and then prudently reversing course and scaling back government, liberals always “double down” and do more of the same (increase government involvement and interference). Let’s go back to the alternative question asked at the top. When will the utopia, the brighter days, the more prosperous and harmonious times that were promised finally come?! The answer is such days will not come, not finally arrive. How bad do things have to get before we reach an inflection point and things start to improve? Readers, it is an ever receding mirage, it is a chimera. They are promising you what they cannot deliver, at least not by their means! And, even when taken to the grotesque, bloody extreme of a totalitarian State, the utopia is never achieved, never realized.
Here is an anecdote that indicates the mindset and arrogance of the liberals.
Willie Brown was mayor of San Francisco in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Cagey and intelligent as he was (and is), he was and is a big government liberal. He was interviewed by one of the local newspapers about the homeless problem in the city (I think this was in 1999). Acknowledging that the long-standing problem was bad and had gotten worse, he said that the problem (of the homeless) may not be solvable. What could he have meant by that remark? Liberal policies and approaches had not solved the homeless problem in his city. Was the mayor asserting it may not be humanly possible to solve the homeless problem? To my knowledge, only liberal policies and approaches had been tried. If liberal policies do not succeed in solving a problem, then are to we to conclude that it is not possible to solve the problem? This is rigid ideology at play in the mayor’s thinking, or at least tunnel vision. Liberals rarely consider that there may be other workable solutions to the ills of society.
We cannot fault the young people for their idealism. The sad irony here is that so many young people buy into this liberal, big government approach that does not work. Their futures are being stolen from them even though they do not see it now. Many of these young people will realize this down the road in 10 or 20 years. The sobering reality will be undeniable. And, future generations of Americans will curse the people of the late 20th century and early 21st century who allowed the US to be so weakened and impoverished and demoralized through a completely out of control federal government that the people elected.
Bonus. We take on Obama (once again).
Some months ago, I heard on the radio of someone (cannot now recall who it was) asserting that Obama is bored with the details of governance because he is so intelligent. (For some, even at this late date, Barack Obama is a demigod.) Here are my thoughts about this.
Obama’s lack of interest in the details of governing and the details of the major issues of the day is not due to boredom because he is so very intelligent, rather he lacks mental discipline. He has a short attention span. By his own admission, he used drugs while in high school and college. Was his drug use heavy and frequent as opposed to the occasional “partying” that many young people engage in? His attention span may have been impaired by such drug use.
Consider Obama’s inability to see through the leftist dogmatic ideology he is immersed in and obsessed with. Every issue has to be filtered through this Leftist prism for him. This shows me that he is effectively not very intelligent.
Obama is a poor example of the age group that I am part of (those born in the late 1950s and early 1960s). I think many of my classmates, both male and female, would make a better president.
As our parting shot today let us quote what we wrote prior to Obama’s re-election in the autumn of 2012 (from the essay “the face of obama”):
We say the face of Obama is the face of arrogance, deceit, and betrayal.
We have seen nothing in these intervening months to change our assessment.
Thanks for reading.
Copyright 2014 – larrysmusings.com