A while back a young progressive-liberal defended her support of BLM with the statement “I care about people.” Suggesting those who didn’t support the BLM rioting didn’t understand and certainly didn’t care about the lives of the African-American minority. That thought; “I care about people” has been ruminating around in my brain for a while, and I think my initial thoughts on her statement were actually correct.
Progressives don’t actually care about people; they care about causes. Caring about people demands personal involvement, caring about causes just requires some sort of positive affirmation of the cause, some outward sign showing you are onboard with the popular movement and therefore a part of the in-crowd. The latter is far easier than the former, as we see with the corporations who’ve made political statements regarding the changes to the voting laws of Georgia that have absolutely zero effect on the corporations themselves. These public corporations are guided by the major stockholders and the CEO’s all of whom are millionaires or greater, so they really don’t care about the poor or middle class, except as they may affect the corporations' bottom line, and they appear to be betting the woke generation will have the greater impact to their profits than the old-timers.
Let’s review the causes.
Black Lives Matter – a cause that purports to seek equal treatment of African-Americans by law enforcement. It has chosen as its heroes several felons who’ve died while being taken into custody by police. It routinely portrays the victims as innocents who suffered at the hands of police brutality. The narrative is one side has no responsibility for their personal past or actions at the time of the arrest, and the other side is just one example of the systemic racism of America. To support this narrative the organization has raised millions of dollars and the “trained Marxist” founder Patrisse Khan-Cullors has used that money for what? As far as I know, she has increased her personal wealth, just like a capitalist[1]. I haven’t seen much work on improving the lives of the African-American community other than rioting. In fact, a rather famous liberal-progressive, Representative Maxine Waters, has interjected herself into the trial of Raymond Floyd’s alleged killer suggesting if he isn’t convicted the people should take to the streets and riot.[2] In no case does it seem this cause is at all interested in actually halting the criminal behaviors that lead to these confrontations in the first place, or improving the actual social conditions leading to those criminal behaviors.
A lot of politicians, and progressives are celebrating the conviction of the Minneapolis officer for the death of George Floyd, but as the saying goes; “It ain’t over til the fat lady sings.” Everyone will speculate as to why the jury ruled as they did, but the officer and his lawyer will probably appeal. What we do know is the rioting will be kept to a minimum by this jury since the mob got the ruling they demanded. Those who support the BLM cause will say justice was served. Those who believe the police officer should have been acquitted will call it a travesty of justice. Justice, you see, is a value statement and depends on the values of who is reporting it.
Pro-abortion (AKA Pro-choice) – When the Supreme Court of the United States decided to legislate a new legal standard in the decision Roe vs. Wade the women of America rejoiced. My generation saw this as a liberating new standard in keeping with the sexual revolution. Women would no longer be required to carry to term any of the “mistakes” they may have made during their romances or experimentations. The abuse of children would end as people who didn’t want children wouldn’t be forced to have them. The financial and social outlooks of young women wouldn’t be damaged by having an unwanted child holding them back. Today, we have an ongoing and seemingly never-ending fight as those who support the murder of a fetus demand the government pays for the privilege to do so. You will note the not subtle condemnation of those who support abortion, for we have now almost 50 years of experience and it is obvious to even the most biased observer that abortion has not made the world better. All the problems that existed before legalized abortion still exist today, in fact, it seems pretty obvious we’ve created a whole new set of issues as many of the problems have gotten far worse as we alter our moral standards regarding personal responsibility and the value of families, the role of responsible parents and education of children.
The SCOTUS said they could not tell when life began, but without a question, medical science has now made a fetus viable almost from conception and yet those who support abortion wish to ignore the reality that life begins inside the womb and not just when they want it to. Those who favor the killing of the unborn have made this a national cause, without regard to the life of the fetus. It is clear - the only life that matters to them is a post-puberty adult. With this argument how far away from the time we decide the lives of the handicapped shouldn’t matter either are we? According to Planned Parenthood, African-American women (who make up 14% of the 14–44-year-old population) accounted for 38% of all abortions in 2018. We can certainly speculate on the societal effects of destroying these many African-American lives, but this focus certainly supports the idea that abortions are racist, but then the pro-abortion crowd and the BLM groups really don’t support any argument that would weaken their political positions.
A living wage – The cry this past year is to raise the national minimum wage to $15.00, up from the current $7.25. Just as in every other debate we hear the doom and gloom over how it will only cause prices to rise, or employees to be laid off. Both of those seem a certainty, and those who are truly unskilled, or handicapped by some disability will suffer if the jobs are automated because they become too costly. But despite the protestations of the conservatives, the wage will be raised. It is inevitable. The ripple effect will be the lowering of the economic well-being of those who make more than the minimum wage as their buying power will be diminished. The fact that most of the voices demanding this new minimum feel themselves immune from the fiscal realities of increased government mandates do not speak well of their ability to think critically about things like cause & effect and supply & demand.
What I never hear discussed is how the government has altered the industrial basis of our society to create a condition where such a large number of people are unable to progress from an entry-level job, paying a minimum wage, into a more rewarding and productive job paying a viable wage to support the individual and his/her family. Why is that?
It was, after all, the government who responded to the lobbyist’s push to enter into trade agreements which incentivized businesses to abandon manufacturing in the US and send their products to places like Sri Lanka, Burkina Faso, and of course China to be made by marginalized people or even slave labor. If I recall these discussions correctly the left argued that this was a great way to help those poor unfortunate countries develop into modern societies. The fact we left those who worked in these industries to deal with the closed factories, and lack of opportunity was just a small price to pay for progress, wasn’t it. After all, we are the richest nation on earth and so what if we create a greater dependence on the government for our daily needs. That’s what government is for, isn’t it?
Universal Health Care – Affordable health care is a right and according to the progressive-left, it is an inalienable one at that! The only problem I see is when the woke generation rejects the idea of a higher power than government how can you say any right is natural or inalienable? If the rights of the people come from the people and government represents the will of the people then if the government can give and take a right it can’t be inalienable. While I’m all for universal health care what is the minimum acceptable standard?
The supporters of universal health care believe the current standard of care must be improved, and the problem with our system is the “for-profit” profiteers who enrich themselves at the cost of the masses. Early in the pandemic, I listened as the woke young progressive liberals lambasted the “for-profit” system for not having enough intensive care facilities to support the expected surge in demand. As I actually researched this claim, I came to find out there was actually a negligible difference between the administration of “for-profit” hospitals and “not for profit” facilities. The fiscal reality is that both types have to contain costs if they are to survive. If we go to a universal care system that obligation to remain affordable simply shifts to the government, and can anyone tell me how the government system will contain costs? There is nothing that suggests a single person in decision-making authority in the Government gives a damn about constraining cost growth. There are two fundamental truths in government spending. If you don’t spend everything you asked for this year you will get less next year, and you are spending other people’s money so when you negotiate a contract be generous. If you doubt his second truth look at the union contracts teachers in Democratic-controlled states and counties have been able to negotiate. In Chicago, for example, when the government was actually willing to send students back to school, who had the final say as to whether they would or not? Was it the parents or the government? No, it was the union.
Now let’s compare the performance of national health care systems like Spain, England, Italy, and Germany in their response to this pandemic? Did they respond quickly to keep the mortality rates down? Now a year later we can look at the figures and see most of the European countries are running between 1,500 to 1,950 deaths per million of their population. How does this compare to the United States? We are at about 1,760 deaths/million so it appears national health care hasn’t made a big difference. How about in distribution of life-saving vaccines? Did the national systems develop and field a vaccine quicker? How about distribution? Are we seeing the national systems outperform the United States? All indications are they have not. Of course, China would appear to be the exception, but who among us believes China is accurately reporting on the disaster they unleashed on the world?
College Debt Forgiveness – Economics majors like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Harvard College Professors like Elizabeth Warren have made a lot of noise about how student debt is weighing down the nation and how much better life would be if we taxpayers just assumed that debt and relieved the individuals from any responsibility for the choices, they made on selecting their options after High School. This seems to be in keeping with the liberal-progressive view that personal responsibility is a cumbersome carry-over of past generations and the Government should actually be responsible for all the decisions made by its erstwhile voters. I’ve not paid a lot of attention to how they would actually fund this other than making the billionaires pay “their fair share.” But it is safe to assume the colleges who’ve raised tuition to such astronomical levels to pay their professors half a million dollars a year to teach one course won’t be asked to dip into their endowments to help out. I’m all for letting everyone have a free Ph.D. The question that comes immediately to mind is how many PhDs does it take to man the counter at MacBurger Queen?
1 comment:
The scary thread that weaves it's way throughout you commentary, is the government is better at making lifetime decisions for the population. What happened to individual choice and individualism in general? Creativity, achievement and happiness are not dependent on the government.
Post a Comment