Thursday, March 25, 2010

Or What!

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.
- George Washington
I can't help but be amazed at liberals. Their trademark is their concern for their fellow man, yet beneath every policy to aid their fellow man lurks a very real threat of violence against him.

How can this be? First, I don't think these people connect their ends with the means necessary to achieve them and they don't see what it is that they actually support. Politicians tell them that reality can be bent, that we can have our cake and eat it too. Politician is a synonym for liar. There is no free lunch, ever.

To get universal health care we are forcing people to purchase a product they do not want. And ask yourself what the consequence of disobedience is? This is what I wish my liberal friends would see. What happens when you don't purchase health care, and you don't pay the fine? Will the government throw up their hands and move on? No, they will send the police, and throw you in jail.

That is not trivial. Your refusal to acquiesce to someone else's desires, your peaceful resistance will be met with violence. And I cannot believe that the very same people so concerned with the planet and humanity at large, can be so indifferent to the fate of one individual.

Truthfully, I believe my liberal friends would be horrified at crimes committed against the individual. And in a way, the individual's lack of resistance has spared them the reality of their position. One day however, and that day may be nearer than we think, the individual will resist, and then the true ugliness of their position will be revealed. Let's hope that day never comes.

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Democracy, who needs it?

The fraud of modern day liberalism is their supposed deference to the will of the majority. TODAY, most Americans oppose the health care legislation about to be rammed down our throat. Does this make any difference to liberals in congress? Do they care that if elections were held today, we would throw the bums out?

Governance should not blindly follow the will of the majority. That's why the founders set up a Republic instead of a democracy. But whenever you have popular outrage over a piece of legislation, the gentlemanly thing to do would be to pause, take a breath, and do nothing. The beauty of conservatism is that it breeds cautiousness; it states that in the face of the unknown it's okay to be as we are today. Because today is pretty darn good. Liberalism is a doctrine of bold ambition for an ideal tomorrow. And it doesn't matter if the people want it or not, their going to get it. More than anything this health care debate has shown that liberalism only defers to democracy when democracy defers to it. So much for the will of the people...

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Education for the masses?

The recent hubbub over Texas modifying their education curriculum has exposed a more fundamental problem. Proponents see this change as returning education to a more balanced perspective, removing what they see (rightly) as liberal bias in education. Opponents see this as a regression, away from universal truth and a march towards intellectual decline.

But the problem has nothing to do with whether or not the Texas authorities bless the right curriculum. Invariably, any curriculum is open to criticism. Someone, somewhere, is bound to disagree with what is being taught. There is no universal educational truth.

In a free market consumers decide which services serve them best. Education is just another service, and it's function is to educate children, and because they are children their parents decide.

Conservatives should bemoan Texas for legitimizing an illegitimate concept: Some group of people know what's better for you than you do. They don't. Let parents decide what curriculum their children ought to learn by giving parents the wherewithall to consume the education of their choice.

Monday, March 15, 2010

It doesn't rain when you dance

When I was in the Air Force I participated in a team exercise. It was some game that a group of officers played and we had to work together to accomplish some made up task.

We did our first task and it went fairly well and we got the highest score. It turns out most everyone got the highest score on that one. Then we debriefed. We talked about what went well and what went poorly. The mood was sunny; brimming with our success we extolled our excellent communication, our teamwork, our plain old awesomeness. Of course I threw in a sour note (I am a sour person). I spoke up and plainly said that we were not so awesome. The reason the task went well, was because the task was easy. I was slaughtered for my comments and one person took particular offense.

Off we go and do the next task. This time things didn't go so well and we failed. During the debriefing, we were brimming with something other than success and this time the comments weren't so rosy. Our communication was off, our teamwork faltered, and we were just plain. Not awesome at all.

After we went back to our rooms, the very person who took offense at my earlier comment said in private, "you were right." A small, yet considerable gesture.

It's a common theme, when you win it's because of skill, when you lose it's because of bad luck. Politics is full of this. When the economy goes up, it's because of some brilliant politician, or economic theory. When it goes down, bad luck, out of your control. The reality is that the economy moves on it's own, and know one really knows what would have happened had the politicians done nothing. Politicians have the benefit of comparing themselves to hypotheticals. And their alternative reality is ALWAYS worse than reality.

So what can we go on? We can't go by results because it is impossible to compare today with a today that didn't happen. We need to go by logic. If it doesn't work for you on a personal level, it doesn't work for a whole bunch of people. No matter how smart the guy telling you that is. Spending more than what you have is a recipe for bankruptcy for the individual and the country. And imposing a cost on people who are productive incentivizes them to be less productive. That's common sense.

Thursday, March 11, 2010

The value of nothing

One big difference between conservatives and liberals is their view on the current state of affairs. Liberals look at how things are and are dismayed. They want to change things, in their words progress. To a new and better future they say. And action is their way of accomplishing it.

Conservatives see things as they are and think they are good enough. They, I, want inaction. I don't want to progress, I am happy with the way things are. The present is pretty damned good, let's keep it that way.

Liberals think the sky is falling, and if it isn't, many of them want it to. The poor are getting poorer, the earth's climate is heading for disaster, and life will end as we know it, or at least the banking system, if we don't DO SOMETHING. NOW! Unfortunately many of these liberals don't believe this, they want power and doing something means empowering them. The others, maybe they do believe the world is going to hell and a hand basket and immediate action is necessary. For them I offer a compromise, a third way if you will.

How about progress, but slowly and sustainable. Movement in the right direction but at a pace society can absorb, at a pace which can be stopped before we fall off the cliff. Keep government spending constant relative to the economy. As the economy grows, the ability for government to progress, take action will grow as well. This benefits everyone and if we work together, we'll get there.