Reply With Quote
Well I'm glad he finally had his epiphany. Still, it seems to merely be an extension of common sense, which admittedly, seems to be in short supply as of late.
By Michael Laser Michael Laser Mon Nov 29, 3:04 pm ET
Montclair, N.J. Without intending to, I've indoctrinated my kids.
I first realized it a few years ago. Seeing a bumper sticker that read "No Hope in Dope," my then-8-year-old asked, "Is that about Bush?"
It happened in the most natural way. They heard me groaning at every word and deed of that "misunderestimated" president, and absorbed my at ude until they could mimic it perfectly.
I'm glad my children share my political orientation, but it bothers me when I hear them unthinkingly mock and dismiss the other side as when my son recently said, "If Republicans want smaller government, they should quit their jobs in Congress."
Lately, I've found myself in the odd position of explaining and even justifying the conservative point of view on taxes, abortion, and regulation of private enterprise, just so my children will understand that people have reasons for their beliefs, even if we disagree.
To my amazement, I've found that some of my political opposites' ideas make sense. This doesn't mean I've reversed my thinking, but it's eye-Luck_The_Fakers_opening. If you shut out the noise of talk radio and your own unshakable faith, you can find persuasive arguments on both sides of the divide. Here are a few that I came up with:
On the social safety net
The conservative view
People are responsible for themselves and, given the chance, they're capable of supporting themselves and their families. If the government makes a practice of providing for people (with welfare, for example), they become dependent and lose their will to work. Nothing could be more destructive to the health of our society.
The liberal view
There are people in this country who struggle to put food on the table or can't afford medical care. A civilized society would try to help them, instead of leaving them to fend for themselves. (Someday, the one who needs a helping hand may be you, or someone you love.)
On taxes
The liberal view
We aren't isolated individuals struggling for survival: We live together, in a society. And membership in a society that makes wealth possible comes with obligations. Those who benefit most from our freedoms must contribute their fair share to help support and protect our society.
The conservative view
Private property means that what belongs to you is yours; if the government confiscates it, that's tyranny. Our most productive citizens the top 10 percent of earners already pay 68 percent of taxes collected. These rates should be cut, not raised.
On the role of government
The conservative view
Governments tend to grow like snowballs rolling downhill. We must work to reverse this trend, or the government will expand and intrude on our lives even more than it does now.
"That government is best which governs least." This means letting the free market do its work without a heavy hand trying to direct or restrain it.
The legitimate functions of federal government are to provide national security through a strong defense and to protect individual freedoms.
The liberal view
Our government's job is to solve problems that private ins utions aren't solving and there's no shortage of problems that need addressing.
Large corporations, if unregulated, will do anything to maximize profits. Even the most courLuck_The_Fakers_ageous individual can't prevent corporate abuses; only the government has the power to do that.
If the government can help create job opportunities during a time of high unemployment, that's a perfect use of tax dollars.
On overcoming racial discrimination
The liberal view
The difference in income between white people and African-Americans is still significant and directly linked to centuries of oppression. We haven't overcome the legacy of slavery yet. There's a long way to go.
The conservative view
Current law protects equal rights for all races, and it's up to individuals to work and succeed according to their abilities. We no longer need to tip the scale toward minorities to make up for what happened long ago. To do so is reverse discrimination, and creates new injustices.
On human nature and justice
The conservative view
We have the power to choose between right and wrong and are responsible for our choices. Those who violate the law must pay the penalties. Too much leniency results in a culture of disrespect for the law and social disorder.
The liberal view
Human beings are capable of both selflessness and brutality. Even the best of us is far from perfect. Knowing this, we rely on the rule of law and ask that justice be tempered with mercy.
On America's future
The liberal view.
Most of the world's most successful, prosperous nations are liberal democracies that provide their citizens with a strong safety net. This represents the natural progress of civilization. It's time for us to catch up with northern Europe.
The conservative view
What makes America great a country so many yearn to live in is the vastness of opportunity here. Freedom of opportunity requires freedom from government interference. We aren't Europe, and it would be wrong to follow Europe's lead
On ideals
The conservative view
Duty, honesty, hard work, self-sacrifice, love of country, loyalty, and self-restraint.
The liberal view
Justice, compassion, equality of opportunity, and clear vision: whats great about our country, and what could be better.
The middle zone
This list of polar disagreements leaves me with fittingly two opposite reactions. The first, more obvious conclusion is that there's no hope, common ground, or room for compromise. And so nothing will get done in Congress over the next two years.
But these opposing viewpoints also suggest a different idea: Contradictory statements can both be true. Yes, America's success lies partly in its dynamism and opportunity and yes, progress requires that we provide for those who have lost their jobs or their health. In other words, if you set your dogma aside, you may find some truth in the ideals of people you've always disagreed with.
Which reminds me of something the extreme partisans would prefer we forget: governing in America has happened mainly in the middle zone, between the far left and far right. Yes, the differences are significant and worth negotiating over, but what we're really talking about is a few percentage points in tax rates, not a choice between socialism and the abolition of all taxes.
Contempt for the opposition may be profitable on talk radio, but it doesn't help the rest of us. All it accomplishes is to drive people further into their angry, fanatical corners.
This is the next political insight I'll be sharing with my kids.
Michael Laser is a novelist and the creator of News-Basics.com, which provides concise overviews of major news topics. More notes on liberal and conservative values can be found there.
---------------------------------------------------------
At some point, I will need to be teaching my kids to think for themselves, and this guy seems to have done a fair job at setting both sides concerns/viewpoints fairly.
It is fully possible to make public policy that incorporates the concerns of people with opposing views, and even (gasp!) that people who hold those views might do so for very principled reasons.
Well I'm glad he finally had his epiphany. Still, it seems to merely be an extension of common sense, which admittedly, seems to be in short supply as of late.
Seems to be overthinking it, really. Raise your kids to be critical thinkers and everything else will fall into place.
Over-wording it, at least.
My child will figure his political views on his own. I would never tell him that our president is a liar or he's a socialist because that would be my opnion. Unfortunately most kids take thier parenst word as gospel and carry on their parents points of view. I don't talk politics with my 8 yr old because he doesn't know enough to differentiate my opinions from the facts. I'd like to think my opinions are based on facts but in the end I have created my own truths. I CRINGE every time I hear someone tell hannity or Rush that their kids get the real news from them.. really? How unfair is that? Teaching your kids how to think is limiting them to seeing an issue from more than one point of view.
"governing in America has happened mainly in the middle zone"
... which is why the Repugs moving to the extreme right and while showing no interest whatsoever in actually governing (eg 2000-2008) is profoundly anti-American. The Repugs/conservatives' fundamental principle is that "government is the problem" to be "solved" by killing it, and therefore has no role in organizing and advancing American civilization.
Common sense?
Sorry but Federal agents with hands down your wifes pants/bailouts to the wealthiest/failure to prosecute fraud rampant on wall st/illegal torture/perpetual war is NOT governing from the center.
An ounce of common sense screams otherwise. Its amazing what bull can be sold by the establishment as "common sense" and bought by the willing many as a-ok/not worth questioning/no need to pull my head out of the green grass.
I remember taking a trip to Yellowstone when I was a kid. We stopped at a rest stop and there was a sign that said "Don't feed the animals". I asked a park ranger why we couldn't feed the animals and he said that the animals would become conditioned to depend on humans for food. If it happend for long enough, the animals would lose their natural ability to find food and would starve to death.
do you have a youtube video?
You need to stop hanging out with boutonski.
Don't be hatin on Youtubes.
Did I say something that doesnt jibe with your "peace in the valley" approach?
Swing and a miss. Keep pluggin tho.Did I say something that doesnt jibe with your "peace in the valley" approach?
Oh wait, was she a great big fat person?
wind up and...Do you disagree with the state of affairs as stated?
Your take of the state of affairs? Yes. It's hyperbole on meth which, oddly, is boutonski's, Yoni's, et al, MO.
I understand the parallel with Boutons, cause I usually agree with his take. I dont read much of Yonis stuff, so I cant agree or otherwise. I also understand the resistance to alarm, because we all want to believe everything is going to be alright.
But can you tell me which of the issues specifically I am overstating (Recap: TSA, Bailuts, QEs, War-after-war, torture, no prosecutions for wall st)?
I'll handle the recap. Thx.
1. "Federal agents with hands down your wifes pants." Sorry. Not happening to my wife.
2. "bailouts to the wealthiest". I'll give you this...since it's really not a modern phenomenon I don't understand the sudden "OH NOES!" it's taking on.
3. "failure to prosecute fraud rampant on wall street". Might be a touch premature on that one. Let's see how it plays out in light of the MERS fiasaco.
4. "Perpetual war". I'm sorry. But, no. It's not perpetual. Say what you mean, not what sounds good.
Rats! I missed the torture.
Is this still going on?
Fair enough. You accept life is pretty here at home. I understand.
Strike two.
Ill be the judge of ty in my own posts thanks.
Ball.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
