Sep 282009
Whatever your political views, I think you’ll find this very short post of interest.
5 Responses to “A Very Short and Important Read”
Comments (5)
photography, woodworking, and such as may strike my fancy
| © 2006-2010 LarryEiss.com | Suffusion WordPress theme by Sayontan Sinha |
I’m perplexed. I don’t see the US as moving towards anything resembling socialism, either in its claimed ideals, actual practices, rhetoric or what-have-you. It seems to me more that we are reverting to something like the Gilded Age at the end of the 19th century. The corporate sector was incredibly powerful, and the financial sub-sector especially so, and responsible for a great deal of economic turmoil. Then, as now, there were enormous changes and innovations in commerce: I imagine one could see the web and e-commerce now as bringing about changes in business as broad and deep as the railroads did then (and if memory serves, investing in railroads could be fraught with peril as investing in tech) The possibility for mischief—or worse—exists at the intersections of commerce and government. It can be as above board as generous, but completely legal contributions to a particular candidate, or it can descend to continuous bribery.
Last, I want to say I am no fan of the current administration. The President’s economic advisers are all people with deep ties to banking, finance, and academic neo-laissez faire economics; it seems the only thing he’s gotten done at all so far is to give the banking and finance sectors a huge present. Meanwhile, US citizens below the top 5% income/net worth are, if anything, worse off than when the man who turned the word HOPE into a mere branding phrase took office. If the Ukrainian gentleman quoted in the linked article meant by “socialism” that the United States is in a state of perilous decay, I agree with him there. Compared to that, everything else is quibbling.
A very interesting perspective, Curtiss. I am ill equipped to respond to much of it. We agree that the U.S. is in a state of perilous decay.
I’ve thought about this a bit and decided it’s important to note what my point actually was. I was not saying that our President is a Socialist nor that it is his goal to actually make the United States of America a Socialist country.
What I WAS saying is that we as a nation are headed in that direction. I think it’s very important to say that now (although it has been true for many decades) because the pace has accelerated greatly. In good conscience, I can no longer sit idly by. I dissent, and I need to say so; or for what do I have this freedom?
Whether the person in the Ukraine is so far on one side of the aforementioned pendulum that s/he cannot accurately see the other is, in my opinion, moot. The fact remains that s/he would have some experience in what being in such a political climate actually does look like. Moreover, it appears from here that the activity noticed by observers of the US these days is being interpreted, by at least some, as tending in a Socialist direction.
I am one of those observers, and I do not believe that I can be said to be either a coward or reckless.
I DO sincerely appreciate the thoughtful response of my friend above, however, and we shall remain friends. ;-)
It’s nice to see you here, David. Thanks for dropping by and for leaving a comment too!
It seems to me that like so many arguments, a flawed premise leads us to a flawed conclusion. There are at least two problems with this essay. The first is that President Obama is not a socialist, nor does he want to make the United States a socialist country. The second is more Aristotelian in nature and quite difficult for me to describe in such a short space – but I will try, nonetheless… :)
On one end of a particular continuum we find cowardice. On the extreme far other end of the same continuum we find recklessness. Directly in the center of the continuum, we find courage. A person who is courageous can correctly identify cowardliness and recklessness because she lives on the mean between the two in a way that allows herself to see them as they actually are. Contrast that with someone who is reckless but incorrectly believes she is courageous. That person incorrectly believes that everyone who isn’t reckless is a coward. Make sense? If we apply that concept to the person in Ukraine, it is my suspicion that living a certain way for so long has impacted that person’s ability to objectively identify the truth about his and other economic systems. As a result, how valuable is that person’s opinion regarding the topic at hand?