The Commons
when it comes to action,The two major parties are almost identical, at least on the national level. The differences between the two are small, and only occassionally do these minor distinctions matter (at least to a few). the Abortion issue and stem cell research immediately comes to mind. Consider Federal and Supreme Court nominees: the picks of both parties have expanded police powers and increased corporate control over ordinary citizens, albeit at a slightly different pace.
Both parties voted for the Patriot Act, Homeland Security Act....Most Dems supported the contrived Iraq war, and during their convention in 2004, they even failed to condemn the doctrine of pre-emption....
But the psychology of the Democratic and Republican person in the street IS different from each other, on average - Dems tend to beore nurturing in attitude, while Republicans tend to be more strict or domineering .....
Alot of harsh anti- crime legislation has been enacted over the past 35-40 years, in response to the actions of A VERY FEW INDIVIDUALS. We are suppose to change our law codes because of what a handful of people do, out of a population of 300 million? (The Levi Amendments of 1976, Clintons anti-terrorism law of 1996, ... the general loss of privacy due to the aftermath of 9-11, ...an event which was largely caused by our misguided policies in the Middle East- if we had a different policy, if we dropped realpolitic and treated other nations with respect, and if we had a cultured and inspired elite (Confucius), then the rest of the world would respond positively.
Its been said that if you economically socialize a people they will become dependant and helpless....
But socialists mostly want certain sectors to become part of the commons- if a worker is injured and goes to hospital and gets billed a years worth of salary for one months worth of treatment, should he be condemned for not having the cash on hand? Does socialized medicine make such people 'dependant' upon the state or should medicine become part of the commons in the way most of our highways and fire departments are? When medical treatment was available to kings and beggars in about equal proportion about 200 years ago, [medicine] didn't need to be considered something that we all should hold in common,... but modern prices have changed the argument. Again- should ordinary people be critisized for not being able to cough up the mega bucks needed for life-saving treatments?
A broad alliance finally worked out a universal health care plan this year in Massachusetts (signed into law by a Republican governor-Mitt Romney) ; hopefully it will be emulated throughout the other states soon, enabling people to live longer, healthier lives. (The new rules make health insurance mandatory-like car insurance- if you are too poor, your employer helps pay).
When Kerry ran against Bush it seemed like he didn't try very hard- the argument against Bush was devastating, but Kerry refused to use it-Kerry could have used winning issues like national healthcare, increased wages for workers, the environmental crisis, etc. Instead, he spent three weeks arguing whether or not he once threw some medals over a fence.......
The right-wing in America caricatures the left- usually attacking the pseudo, fringe PC left (the anti-fur people, the ACLU's attempts to remove religious symbols from courtrooms....). The authentic left wants higher wages, less corporate control, a single payer healthcare system, local government control, and a protected environment....things that the overwhelming majority of citizens want....
Both parties are owned by the same financial interests...take their orders from the same corporations....
the illusion of opposition is maintianed by using 'Hobson Choices.' On TV political shows and elsewhere, two viewpoints are contrasted, but in reality both are false, yet one is stronger than the other....
Twice in my life the size of government and deficits swelled to insane proportions- with Reagan after 1981, and with George W. Bush after 2001. Both created more laws and regulations, in just three years than Clinton did in his entire eight years in office. So this seems to be the real difference between the parties- Republicans spend alot, increase government, and cut taxes to the super rich (top 1% got 40% of the breaks each time), while Democrats are fiscally more conservative.
Both parties voted for the Patriot Act, Homeland Security Act....Most Dems supported the contrived Iraq war, and during their convention in 2004, they even failed to condemn the doctrine of pre-emption....
But the psychology of the Democratic and Republican person in the street IS different from each other, on average - Dems tend to beore nurturing in attitude, while Republicans tend to be more strict or domineering .....
Alot of harsh anti- crime legislation has been enacted over the past 35-40 years, in response to the actions of A VERY FEW INDIVIDUALS. We are suppose to change our law codes because of what a handful of people do, out of a population of 300 million? (The Levi Amendments of 1976, Clintons anti-terrorism law of 1996, ... the general loss of privacy due to the aftermath of 9-11, ...an event which was largely caused by our misguided policies in the Middle East- if we had a different policy, if we dropped realpolitic and treated other nations with respect, and if we had a cultured and inspired elite (Confucius), then the rest of the world would respond positively.
Its been said that if you economically socialize a people they will become dependant and helpless....
But socialists mostly want certain sectors to become part of the commons- if a worker is injured and goes to hospital and gets billed a years worth of salary for one months worth of treatment, should he be condemned for not having the cash on hand? Does socialized medicine make such people 'dependant' upon the state or should medicine become part of the commons in the way most of our highways and fire departments are? When medical treatment was available to kings and beggars in about equal proportion about 200 years ago, [medicine] didn't need to be considered something that we all should hold in common,... but modern prices have changed the argument. Again- should ordinary people be critisized for not being able to cough up the mega bucks needed for life-saving treatments?
A broad alliance finally worked out a universal health care plan this year in Massachusetts (signed into law by a Republican governor-Mitt Romney) ; hopefully it will be emulated throughout the other states soon, enabling people to live longer, healthier lives. (The new rules make health insurance mandatory-like car insurance- if you are too poor, your employer helps pay).
When Kerry ran against Bush it seemed like he didn't try very hard- the argument against Bush was devastating, but Kerry refused to use it-Kerry could have used winning issues like national healthcare, increased wages for workers, the environmental crisis, etc. Instead, he spent three weeks arguing whether or not he once threw some medals over a fence.......
The right-wing in America caricatures the left- usually attacking the pseudo, fringe PC left (the anti-fur people, the ACLU's attempts to remove religious symbols from courtrooms....). The authentic left wants higher wages, less corporate control, a single payer healthcare system, local government control, and a protected environment....things that the overwhelming majority of citizens want....
Both parties are owned by the same financial interests...take their orders from the same corporations....
the illusion of opposition is maintianed by using 'Hobson Choices.' On TV political shows and elsewhere, two viewpoints are contrasted, but in reality both are false, yet one is stronger than the other....
Twice in my life the size of government and deficits swelled to insane proportions- with Reagan after 1981, and with George W. Bush after 2001. Both created more laws and regulations, in just three years than Clinton did in his entire eight years in office. So this seems to be the real difference between the parties- Republicans spend alot, increase government, and cut taxes to the super rich (top 1% got 40% of the breaks each time), while Democrats are fiscally more conservative.
posted by Zero at 12:25 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home