FirmhandKY -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/25/2009 6:46:45 AM)
|
Panda, I can see your logic and your point. While I may disagree with some of your assessments, I honor your thinking. But I see the problem somewhat differently than you do. People are people, everywhere. Personal concerns are almost always paramount, and it is a rare individual who will rise outside of those parochial interests for "reasons of state". Several thoughts come to mind when I read your posts about this situation: If the US government was not already so powerful, it would not have had the ability, even if it had the inclination to do as you say. Why is the government so powerful and why are the people so alienated from it that they allow it to act in such a manner? I think the answer is that we are already so far down the road away from personal sovereignty that we see nothing wrong or out of whack with a government taking such actions - or just about any action which can it can define as "in the public good". It has used the philosophies of taxations and "the general welfare" (collectivism) to such and extent, over such a long period of time, that the public doesn't generally believe it can stop the government from taking whatever action it wishes, and doesn't necessarily see any reason to do so. Why? Because the population has progressively given the power and the right of the government to act in "the greater good" in so many other aspects of life. This is the Achilles heel of collectivism when it comes to individual freedom and social responsibility: the reduction of personal responsibility because the government has taken more and more of the responsibility in the social fabric of our society. Over time, the result is a more passive and dependent population. You are angry that people didn't stand up to the government, and didn't somehow prevent what you see as an injustice. But why should they? We are being trained and taught that "the government will make it right". So what is the solution? How can we reframe the social and political structure to empower the individual, and remove the ability or inclination of "the government" to act in ways that we find immoral, or antithetic to our ideals? Or do we? You don't see any possibility that "the people" will rise up in some fashion, to make this change. I'm not sure that you aren't correct, and maybe the pot that all us lobsters are in has already heated up enough that we are dinner just waiting to be served. But I don't think that that is inevitable. I do think that there is a large reservoir of people, and thought in the US that may eventually decide to act, or that conditions may present themselves that will allow them to act. Otherwise, I see no other path than even greater loss of individual power, and even greater gain of power by the government, so that "the state" will eventually subsume the individual and we'll all live in the anthill of society, ruled by a government of special interests who use the rationale of "the greater good" to extinguish every glimmer of individuality. I don't like being an ant or a lobster, and I suspect from your posts, neither do you. Neither do a lot of people. Firm
|
|
|
|