Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Great post. Our definitions of "proper" government seem very much alike. It just gets really scary to me when we start including concepts like "fair", "just", and your "hurt" into the definition. These are quite arbitrary distinctions that can lead to an infinite number of interpretations. Is it not these changing "definitions" that lead to most abuse by those in power? Any such arbitrary distinctions can be twisted to fit any government policy or belief.
Just to clarify, are you an anarchist or a minarchist as your label does not specify? You can be an individualist within a minarchism. If you are a minarchist, then I am all on board. Anarchism is great, but sadly, it is not a natural human state and thus is simply transitional. Minarchism, on the other hand, is precisely what freedom loving people should strive for.
Great post. Our definitions of "proper" government seem very much alike. It just gets really scary to me when we start including concepts like "fair", "just", and your "hurt" into the definition. These are quite arbitrary distinctions that can lead to an infinite number of interpretations. Is it not these changing "definitions" that lead to most abuse by those in power? Any such arbitrary distinctions can be twisted to fit any government policy or belief.
Indeed, I agree. Such is human nature- another factor we must consider and they did too. Culturally we have notions of "just" and "hurt" and so forth, but legislation of these things does seem to get us in trouble. Often well meaning attempts do more damage than good.
So I guess another philosophical question is since we can quantify social mores, should we default to a 'less perfect union' until we can?
Seems like though, deep down, we know what the right thing to do is. Like the 80 year old woman who shot herself over the foreclosed house. The Gov paid that loan.
I think the major problem is that no matter what you believe, you have those who will screw and play the system no matter which one you have. You have extreme corruption on both sides and can't tell who's side is whose without a scorecard.
As a centrist leaning to libertarian, I'm in the middle. That's the the third vision, the one that exists but you didn't offer. The one where you pick and choose and trade and balance the two other visions into a workable compromise that may not please everybody, but its the one that works best for the majority. Hopefully someday we'll kick the conservatives and the liberals out of power and everyone can enjoy real change.
Intelligent people may waste their time debating semantics, but your parting example to me, is irrelevant to the discussion. An individual's plight, in my mind, has nothing at all to do with government. I look at say an indigent person and try to imagine why it is that this person has no family, friends, or neighbors willing to help. I do not ever think that the government is responsible for this "unfairness". I think about what may be "wrong" with the people who know this person and do not help or what has this person done to make everyone not have sympathy for him/her.
I view these individual problems as problems within the smaller community or social group having little to do with the people as a whole. I am probably off base here to some, but that is how I feel. Trying to have government (federally) try to legislate away problems that arise in a free society will probably always seem silly to me. There is a reason things happen when people act freely, they are obeying human nature. If human nature does not "solve" the "problems", perhaps there is a natural need for these "problems" to occur.
If everyone was content and happy, how would the species ever evolve. We would not even know what not to do much less where we should be going. Rambling....sorry.
I think that you are reading into what is being discussed here as between Republican and Democrat belief systems. It is not, and I have done everything that I can to avoid that debate, which is ridiculous when you consider how much variation exist within any one party or the overall similarity between the two parties. You mention being in the "center" which is great. You then state that you are a Libertarian as a third option. I have to disagree based on my particular understanding of the Libertarian platform. I believe that that platform rests very close to the extreme of protecting freedoms versus providing security at the expense of freedoms.
This thread though, which has absolutely nothing at all to do with any political party whatsoever, was intended to discuss the more philosophical base of political thought.
There are two big unified visions in America. One vision believes that government's primary role is to solve nearly every problem in society without being required to protect the freedoms of those hurt by the "solution". The other vision believes that government's primary function is to ensure an environment where people have the maximum possible freedom to pursue their interests and absolutely no business in fixing "problems" that result from this freedom.
Count me as another poster somewhere in the middle.
I believe that the Federal Government should serve us in the following sectors:
Defense/Military/Intelligence Gathering (this is a given)
Infrastructure - Ideally, I'd like to see advanced public transportation grids in all of our metropolitan areas, but I understand that this also falls into the State/Local gov't.
Environment - Again, this also has to fall into the State/Local level, however it is important that we hold companies accountable for pollution and carbon emissions.
Business - I'm not for total regulation, but complete de-regulation is obvioulsy flawed.
Health Care - I believe it is a right to all citizens. My girlfriend works for a small business that doesn't provide her with health care, so I understand the struggle that millions of Americans have to go through every month. I used to feel different about this, since I've always had good benefits, but now I just feel bad for those that can't afford it, or won't receive it from their employer.
There is a flaw in your view where we are on one side or the other. There are many many shades of grey outside of the black and white view of Anarchy vs. Communism.
In some cases a lack of government intervention is desired (In my mind most social issues) in other cases government intervention is desired (I'd prefer some form of government healthcare since the private health insurance is a total disaster, building infrastructure like roads, etc.).
I agree. I don't fall into either extreme category. I fall to the left on social issues. I think the government should stay out of it. I'm more moderate on economic issues. I don't need a "hand out" from the government. My husband and I have made good choices with our money and live within our means. I'm upset about the bailouts, foreclosures, help for the people being foreclosed on. The whole thing makes me sick because I'm one of the tax payers bailing out other people who made mistakes. However, to let it all go unregulated, strictly capitalist, I think the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer, and the middle class will disappear. That is not good for society, in general.
Any and all honest replies are welcome and I appreciate your input.
To everyone,
Does this sentiment that is becoming the dominant one on this thread, that being one of where a claim is made to belong to a "middle" position, bolster the idea I offered in an earlier post. This idea being that perhaps most people are "united" but in a way that creates limitless and perpetual division. The "middle" position simply being a core belief that holds that government only exists to serve specifically their own particular individual interests and beliefs.
If this is the case, are these people not simply, although not clearly, practicing a small form of despotism using government force as a weapon against others to get what they want in the chaos that stems from such a fluid foundation?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
