Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » In Defiance of the Governed, Liberals Prevail

In Defiance of the Governed, Liberals Prevail

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

We have learned much from this health care debacle. We learned that liberals will act in spite of the will of their constituents. We learned that elected officials really do have a price. We learned that Obama and the Democratic party truly do not believe in bipartisanship. Most troubling, we understand now more than ever that our government is not afraid to act against the will and without the consent of the governed.

We're from the government and we're here to help

One of the most fundamental concerns about a government health care system is simply the level of trust you have in your government. The vast majority of polling over the last six months indicates that the American people did not support this particular health care overhaul. But on a much broader scale, Americans do not trust their government to begin with.

In fact, a CNN/Opinion Research poll found that only 26% of Americans trust the federal government always or most of the time. That number is as low as was in 1994, when Republicans won control of both Houses of Congress. Americans do not feel comfortable handing the reins over to a government whose largest programs, specifically Social Security, Medicare, and the Postal Service, lie in state of disrepair.

"Pro-Life" Democrats Have a Price

Bart Stupak (D-MI), once thought of as a pro-life champion, proved that his pro-life credentials could be bought. Instead of actually having pro-life wording in the healthcare bill, Stupak settled for the mere promise of an executive order from Barack Obama. If Stupak is not spineless, he is certainly naive. We're talking about Barack Obama, the most pro-choice President in the history of America. Remember his first act as president? It was a pro-choice executive order.

Even as a State Senator, Obama had a sterling pro-choice record, supporting partial-birth abortion and procedures that border on infanticide. During his time in the U.S. Senate, he received a 100% rating from NARAL. This is not the man you go to looking for an executive order that supports the sanctity of life. It is no wonder that the Susan B. Anthony List has rescinded their "Defender of Life" award to Stupak.

The Myth of the "Post-Partisan" President

Barack Obama campaigned as a "post-partisan," indicating that the era of acrimony and strife in Congress would end as soon as he walked through the door of the Oval Office. This has been anything but the case. This health care legislation has proven to be the most divisive issue for this country in the past twenty years.

Last night, Nancy Pelosi referenced hallmark legislation like Social Security, Medicare and Civil Rights. She said that health care would take its place among these legendary moments. There's only one problem: all of the ones she mentioned had bipartisan voting support, health care did not. In fact, the only thing bipartisan about this health care bill was its opposition. Obama's promise of bipartisanship has not simply been broken, it has been finely crushed.

They Will Pay, But So Will We

A lot can happen in eight months. But it seems highly unlikely that Obama and the Democratic party will not suffer the consequences of this health care legislation. If Americans were angry and frustrated before this legislation passed, they will be even more angry and frustrated now. The loss of both Houses of Congress to the GOP seems to be a strong possibility. But with the cuts to an already damaged MediCare system, along with expanded government control and regulation over the health care industry, America will also feel the sting from this bill.

The Challenges Begin

At least twelve states are prepared to challenge this bill. Hopefully, this plan will eventually be eroded by constitutional challenges like several programs in FDR's New Deal were. But at this point, repairing the damage of ObamaCare will certainly be an uphill battle.

Fortunately, America is no stranger to overcoming obstacles. Challenges have only made us stronger. As we have in the past, America will take a stand against those who govern against the will of the governed.

Round one: Statists and Liberals.

But the battle has only begun. 

Powered by

About Braden

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    Kinda tired of people expressing their hatred of the legislation without refuting certain parts of it. At least the Republican congressmen had the decency to do that, sorta.

    I’m cynically optimistic myself, but rejecting it outright on principle is counterproductive.

  • zingzing

    so conservatives now make up “the governed.” curious. i forgot that liberals no longer voted. or at least i wasn’t informed. let me mark it down. now where’s my voting pen? oh, there it is. duly noted.

    wait, it’s not just voters, i guess. i’ll mark it in my “i’m not an american anymore because i don’t agree with braden” book. now where’s my i’m not an american anymore because i don’t agree with bradening pen? bradened.

    maybe the liberals actually ARE working for the will of their constituents… you know, the ones who voted for them… and not you, the one who didn’t vote for them. ever give that a thought?

    you seem to think your point of view is the totality of american thought. sorry to say it’s obviously not.

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    Plenty of the governed wanted this so spare the absolute nonsense and I intend both meanings of that phrase

    “We learned that elected officials really do have a price.”

    If you didn’t know that before now, I am not sure how you consider yourself “specialized in politics”. Sounds like you are, oh what’s the word, “naive”. Rep Cunningham (R) from San Diego had a price. Did that have you all a fluster?

    “This health care legislation has proven to be the most divisive issue for this country in the past twenty years.”

    True and both sides are too blame. Putting it just on one side is disingenuous.

    “A lot can happen in eight months.”

    Credit where it is due. This is one of the few things you have right so any political predictions are awfully premature and rather pointless.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Perhaps we can just say “majority of the governed” – that’s certainly accurate.

    Dave

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    No it isn’t. Try “the majority in some polls”

  • http://www.thecobraslair.com Cobra

    I don’t understand. Barack Obama campaigned for two years with universal health care being the core of his social platform. He debated with Hilary Clinton and other Democrats 22 times, where they detailed ad nauseum their universal health care plans(yeah, Hilary had one too, remember?) And with that knowlege, 53% of the electorate voted for Obama.
    President Obama achieved much of what he said he was going to do about health care, like it or not. You cannot accuse him of fooling people. It should come as no shock that he was going to push health care reform in the first year.

    He delivered on a promise. And I truly believe that only the disinformation campaign of the health care lobby, Fox News and hate radio is causing the perception that this bill is something other than a close cousin of Bob Dole(R) & Howard Baker’s(R) alternative to Clinton’s proposal in 1993, or Romneycare in Mass.

    Don’t take my word for it, though…

    “But we do know that the gap between this plan and traditional Republican ideas is not very big. The Obama plan has a broad family resemblance to Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts plan. It builds on ideas developed at the Heritage Foundation in the early 1990s that formed the basis for Republican counter-proposals to Clintoncare in 1993-1994.”

    David Frum, Former Bush Speech Writer

    As Frum, no liberal, explains, the GOP had AMPLE opportunities to come to the table on this bill (which by the way, has 200 Republican Amendments)

    “A huge part of the blame for today’s disaster attaches to conservatives and Republicans ourselves.

    At the beginning of this process we made a strategic decision: unlike, say, Democrats in 2001 when President Bush proposed his first tax cut, we would make no deal with the administration. No negotiations, no compromise, nothing. We were going for all the marbles. This would be Obama’s Waterloo – just as healthcare was Clinton’s in 1994.”

    The GOP set their strategy. Democrats weren’t just “wrong” or “misguided”. That’s not enough red-meat for the base. They were depicted as the EVIL EMPIRE
    by the RNC in their fund raisers, complete with mocking cartoons and graphics of Obama, Pelosi and Reid. The catch words and phrases spread like wildfire..”Socialist”,”Communist”, “Marxist”, “Hitler”…
    Well, the problem is…you can’t call somebody all of those things and then be seen negotiating with him. A pact with the “devil” never turns out well in literature.

    –Cobra

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Perhaps “the majority in every poll that’s not designed to produce a biased result.”

    Dave

  • cannonshop

    7: Dave, put it like it is:the people who wanted a free ride on the backs of their neighbours won.

    Fact is, the Leeches outnumber us, Dave, nothing will come out of this, it’s over, the mobs have figured out that they can vote themselves largesse from the treasury-after all, we’re talking about Democrats here, and they don’t pay taxes.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    cannonshop,

    This is what you really think?

    Fact is, the Leeches outnumber us, it’s
    over, the mobs have figured out that they can vote themselves largesse from the treasury-after all, we’re talking about Democrats here, and they don’t pay taxes.

    sad…

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    One more thing:

    “the only thing bipartisan about this health care bill was its opposition.”

    On CNN Sunday night Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz said, “there are two hundred amendments that were offered and accepted by Republicans, offered by Republicans and accepted by Democrats and incorporated into this bill. This is a bill that is bipartisan in content”

    That contradicts what you say. I don’t know the answer but can you dispute her claims?

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    I cannot believe what I’m reading!

    After over 6 months of torturous article after torturous bullshit article on the grab of one sixth of your economy called “health care reform”, you are all now arguing over the detritus like rats over a vomited up squirrel!! Two articles or more on this garbage!

    Nobody cares about your liberals or conservatives or libertarians or socialists. The world is waiting to see when it can feast on the corpse of what was once the most powerful nation on earth.

    And not a one of you can see this!

    Not a single one of you wants to – or is capable of – looking beyond your own shores to see the economic disaster brewing in Europe or consider how the refusal of your major creditors to lend you more money on stupid projects – like a grab of one sixth of the economy under government control – will send you over the cliff.

    I begin to comprehend now how it was that the Romans fell to the Visigoths and other barbarians. It wasn’t that they couldn’t fight the Visigoths – they were mentally incapable of realizing the threat until it was way too late.

    And it is obvious that you too, are mentally incapable of seeing the knife of History at your own throats.

    Only after History has slit your throats open and you are gurgling in your death throes, will you begin to comprehend. Then, of course, it will be too late.

    And that is how the mighty, who think they will last forever, are brought down to the dust. Have a pleasant day! There won’t be too many more pleasant ones left to you.

  • Mark

    It’s deceptive to talk about a ‘will of the governed’ that is in any way independent of the political process.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Except in an ideal world, perhaps, as per Rousseau’s “general will”?

  • Jordan Richardson

    I don’t see how a bill can be considered bipartisan when not one single Republican voted for it. And I don’t see that it matters if the thing was bipartisan, either.

    Fuck ’em. The whole reason this bill is such a wreck is that the Democrats kowtowed to the Republican agenda. And the Republicans only had designs on squashing it and pissing on it from the start, no matter what “concessions” were in it to appease their boneheaded constituents.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    This is absolutly false and here is the link.

    There’s only one problem: all of the ones she mentioned had bipartisan voting support, health care did not. In fact, the only thing bipartisan about this health care bill was its opposition.

    The Republicans have been here every step of the way, beginning with Theodore Roosevelt in the 1900’s.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Yes, I wish we didn’t have any boneheaded people in this country…

  • Dr. Guillotin

    I’m sure that we could arrange some humane solution to boneheadedness.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Braden, et al,

    Wake up boys and girls! This Mail-On-line article by Mary-Ellen Synon explains the nature of the leader you have chosen.

    Let’s have a look, shall we?

    One of the reasons a lot of Americans find Obama oddly foreign is that he had an oddly foreign childhood: his formative years were spent in Indonesia. His half-sister, Maya Soetoro Ng, was born there. The rest of Obama’s childhood was spent in Honolulu, a Pacific Ocean capital soaked in East Asian culture.

    ………Obama is the first US president who was raised without cultural or emotional or intellectual ties to either Britain or Europe. The British and the Europeans have been so enchanted with ‘America’s first black president’ that they haven’t been able to see what he really is: America’s first Third World president.

    The article goes on to point out how Obama has ditched Britain, France and Germany, detailing how he has decided that Maggie Thatcher’s victory in the Falklands ought be reversed – and that the islands ought to become las islas malvinas after all, with the blessing of a UN stamp and watermark.

    Obama has ditched Israel, Poland and other putative allies, all in favor of this Third World multi-racial New World Order – financed by George Soros.

    Mary-Ellen has more to say about Obama worth remembering:

    Remember, Obama is a deracinated individual. He has no roots. He is a man from an Asian-Pacific background bred to no admiration for the ancient constitutional history which, until now, has reached across the Atlantic to bind America and Britain.

    The president actually feels that the US Constitution, which grew out of Magna Carta and the 1689 Bill of Rights, is ‘inadequate.’

    Indeed, Obama has stated that, because the US Constitution guarantees only ‘negative rights’ — that is, establishes what the US Government may not do to individuals or to the sovereign states — instead of giving people guarantees of food, shelter education and health care and the rest, it is ‘inadequate.’

    That is one reason he has worked so hard to get the health care legislation through Congress. It is undoubtedly unconstitutional. Already, the attorneys-general of Florida and South Carolina are poised to challenge its constitutionality in court. At least another dozen state attorneys-general may join in the suit.

    Obama has made it clear he despises both the US Constitution and the British tradition from which it springs.

    Now don’t react by digging your nose into the constitution and arguing over it. React by looking across and away from your own borders, and start understanding that this fellow Obama/Soetoro – a man who really does not want you to know who he is – is doing nothing for your benefit at all….

    IN other words, this has nothing to do with the Republicrats in congress. This has to do with imposing a vision of your country that you will discover is very different from your own – and very foreign to you. When your new lords and masters from the Third World and China start to lord it over you as you try to recover from the wrecked economy the oil and banking establishment has left you – only then will understand how you have been purposely impoverished – only then will you understand what suckers you have been played for.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    If you want an American vision of all this, you can read what Mike Ledeen has to say about an American Dictatorship. Enjoy the read.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    The Republicans have been here every step of the way, beginning with Theodore Roosevelt in the 1900’s.

    Yes, Jeannie. Republicans have a history of supporting sensible expansion of access to medical care for all Americans. What does that have to do with this bill?

    Dave

  • Doug Hunter

    What’s not to like?

    -Let’s see, it mandates 32 million new customers to insurance companies while requiring them to sell higher priced plans. There is a new tax on them, but there’s also a couple trillion to be placed on the Chinese credit card (if it ain’t maxed out) and handed to the aforementioned insurers to balance things out.

    -There’s 32 million new customers and little in the way of plans for new doctor’s, hospitals, and infrastructure. Certainly demand creates supply, but it does that by raising prices going against the stated goal of the bill to lower costs. The only way it gets the farcical ‘affordable’ in it’s title is for those who are getting someone else to pay for theirs (it’s always affordable when someone else pays).

    We’ve got a plan that increases taxes, increases the deficit, gives a massive handout to health megacorps, increases healthcare demand without a corresponding increase in supply, and eliminates choice… great job America!!!

  • Baronius

    Ruvy, conservatives like Mark Steyn see the connection between this issue and our international power. He says:

    …governmentalized health care not only changes the relationship of the citizen to the state but the very character of the people. As I wrote in NR recently, there’s plenty of evidence to support that from Britain, Canada, and elsewhere.

    More prosaically, it’s also unaffordable. That’s why one of the first things that middle-rank powers abandon once they go down this road is a global military capability. If you take the view that the U.S. is an imperialist aggressor, congratulations: You can cease worrying. But, if you think that America has been the ultimate guarantor of the post-war global order, it’s less cheery. Five years from now, just as in Canada and Europe two generations ago, we’ll be getting used to announcements of defense cuts to prop up the unsustainable costs of big government at home. And, as the superpower retrenches, America’s enemies will be quick to scent opportunity.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    It’s good for some of us not to have any roots weighing us down, Ruvy.

    This bill was written by both parties, House, and Senate, Dave.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    C-shop –

    we’re talking about Democrats here, and they don’t pay taxes.

    WHHHAAAAAATTT?!?!?!?

    If that’s the case, then the government needs to repay me a few hundred thousand dollars I’ve paid in taxes over the years!

    BTW – did you know that generally speaking, blue states PAY more federal taxes then they receive from the federal government…and red states generally RECEIVE more federal money than they pay in taxes? Here’s the census.gov article.

    Ah, but don’t listen to me – protect your illusions, C-shop!

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Thank you , Glenn, I’m not the only one insulted by that little dig.

  • Baronius

    “Remember his first act as president? It was a pro-choice executive order.”

    Not true. President Obama has publicly signed a total of 46 executive orders, none of which concerned abortion. He signed five in his first two days. On the third day of his presidency, he issued a memorandum rescinding the Mexico City Policy (which prohibited US support of organizations which fund overseas abortions). The Mexico City Policy has always been handled through memoranda, not executive orders.

  • http://soldieroftruth.wordpress.com Braden

    Correction, Baronius: it was an executive order.

  • Baronius

    PolitiFact rates Obama’s September 9th claim of bipartisanship as Barely True. Republican amendments have been approved, but they have been mostly technical, not substantial. None of the Republicans’ policy initiatives have been written into the health care package, except for insurance breaks for wellness.

  • Baronius

    Braden, ABC News calls it an executive order, but the Federal Register and the White House call it a memorandum. The document begins:

    Memorandum for
    the Secretary of State
    the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development

    Subject: Mexico City Policy and Assistance for Voluntary Population Planning

    I guess it’s an executive order, in that it was written by the executive and it’s an order. But it’s not an Executive Order.

  • http://soldieroftruth.wordpress.com Braden

    In addition to ABC, Gallup and USA Today also reported it as an executive order. I tell ya what, you really can’t trust the media these days…

  • PulSamsara

    Go Barack !
    Fight the Red-Neck HORDE !
    Keep up the Great Work !

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Red-Neck HORDE – I like that!

    Sounds like barbarians at the gate. The only thing left to do is to throw them outside the city limits and keep ’em there.

  • Baronius

    I don’t know what to tell you, Braden. One thing that all sources agree upon is that it wasn’t issued until January 23rd, so it was definitely not the first thing Barack Obama did as president. He had said that the first thing he’d do is sign the Freedom of Choice Act, but that’s different. (It’s also nonsense, because a president can’t sign an act unless Congress sends it to his desk.)

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    I guess whether the Administration acted ‘in defiance of the governed’ depends on what the will of the governed actually is.

    Is it opinion polls, which are open to a huge variety of interpretation; or election results, which are empirical?

    Just bear this in mind: you Americans elect your executive and legislative branches to fixed terms – not just until they do something you don’t like.

  • Baronius

    True, Dread. And I don’t think much of politicians who follow the whims of the polls.

  • cannonshop

    #24 Glenn, you so often trumpet that you’re an “Independent”…besides, you, being in support of the left, can’t tell me that the money was ever yours-clearly it belongs to the Government, you just carried it a while.

    After all, is that NOT how you see it for the rest of us?

    (SO you’re not owed a damn thing, see? You’re only owed if something was taken illegitimately and without your consent…)

    But, as a non-Democrat, you don’t HAVE to pay taxes, you GET to pay Taxes. Just like now, we all GET to buy Health Insurance, or else GET to pay a fine (and if you don’t pay the fine, of course, you GET to go to Jail…)

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Depending on who you listen to (and whether who you’re listening to wants to depict him as a saint or as bilge sludge), Obama’s first act as President was either to order all unborn babies brought to him on a giant silver platter so that he could eat them publicly on the steps of the Capitol, or to close Guantanamo Bay and send George Bush there for a vacation.

    His actual first act was to designate Inauguration Day as a National Day of Renewal and Reconciliation – which worked out well as we all know. 😉

    The first bill he signed into law was the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.

    As for him saying that the first thing he’d do would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act, well, that was obviously wishful thinking – much as one of us might say, “If I were President, I’d…”

  • Baronius

    Dread, I’m reluctant to guess what President Obama’s first act was, for the same reason I referred to “public” executive orders. I’m sure a lot of things happen on that first day that we don’t know about. If we are to believe National Treasure: Book of Secrets, the first thing that happens is the President reads the secret journal that contains the truth about Nicolas Cage’s great-grandfather.

  • cannonshop

    #25 Chuck Rangel, Tim Geithner, sundry others occupying positions in the Administration and Congress right now, Jeannie. It’s clear-we could probably solve our entire deficit problem if rich democrats would just pay the same taxes everyone else has to.

  • cannonshop

    Or don’t you find it the least odd that the people who want to increase your taxes, have to be caught before they pay their own?

  • Glenn Contrarian

    C-shop –

    Did I ‘so often say’ I am an independent? When? Maybe I did once or twice, but I don’t remember it. In any case, I was an alternate state delegate for Hillary in the 2008 election. That should tell you where I am.

    When it comes to money, please show me where I ever made that claim. If you can’t, then please do not make false accusations.

    What I HAVE said is that none of us ever truly owns the land on which we build our houses…because what happens if we don’t pay our property taxes? The government takes it (unless if you’ve got a homestead exemption, IIRC). You could easily and accurately say that property taxes are a form of rent. Am I wrong? If so, then please show me how I’m wrong.

    And when it comes to taxes, I GLADLY pay them. Why? How about you do some research and see which countries have a HIGH tax rate and which countries have a LOW tax rate? With the exception of several dictatorships who bleed their people to the bone, countries who charge HIGH tax rates generally have a MUCH higher standard of living.

    Those who charge a LOWER standard of living (or have a high tax rate but a very low tax collection rate) are almost without exception third-world countries.

    So…why is that, C-shop? Why is it that countries with really low tax rates are almost always third-world countries? After all, according to conservative dogma, a country with a really low tax rate should be doing really, really well!

    You see, C-shop – a lot of conservatives see taxes as a form of tyranny (“My money is MINE! MINEMINEMINE!”), whereas most liberals see taxes as the price of admission to live in a country like America (“Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s”). Now why do you suppose my Lord Jesus said that?

    I look forward to your answers to the above questions!

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    I am so sick and tired of whiny Conservatives presenting a distorted case on how so-called Democrat Liberals usurped their authority in defiance of the governed. Get a grip. Both sides of the aisle are equally guilty of screwing this country up. If you want a tit for tat contest, I’m ready.

    There are ideas from both sides of the aisle which have merit when applied properly. This was a victory for lobbyists and corporate financiers of elections campaigns. True health care reform will not be accomplished until corporate greed is taken out of the equation, period.

    This morning President Obama said,“With all the punditry, all of the lobbying, all of the game-playing that passes for governing in Washington, it’s been easy at times to doubt our ability to do such a big thing, such a complicated thing; to wonder if there are limits to what we as a people can still achieve.” Well, he got that right. Congress doesn’t govern — it plays games — with our lives. It doiesn’t matter if it is Pelosi or Gingrich; Reid or McConnell. It’s a numbers game of colossal propoortions which our little minds have an inability to conceive.

    You want to help this cursed economy? Kill lobbyist funding tomorrow. Break up every corporation which does not pass a “too big to fail” means test developed by the CBO. Overhaul our Federal electoral process and make an official campaign season 12 weeks long and obliterate the Presidential Primary system. The savings we realize will trickle down to every family in every village across this land. That is not redistribution of wealth, my friends, that is the American ideal. Come out from behind your barriers on the Right or Left. Welcome other modes of thought to the national debate. Let us return to those ideals which serve as this nation’s foundation. Ideals which we have long forgotten in the shadow of our cynicism.

    This is not a time for partisan bickering; rather it is a time for this country to stand up and realize that the ultimate survival of that which was given to us depends on our actions in the immediate days ahead. If we cannot forge that union once more, then let us find a way to dissolve it. Let’s forge a new future for our children and theirs where they can carry the extinguishing torch we pass and once again refuel it with their hopes and dreams.

    Amen.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    C-shop –

    Or don’t you find it the least odd that the people who want to increase your taxes, have to be caught before they pay their own?

    While you’re ruminating the other post, did you know that there are criminals and tax cheats in BOTH parties? Sure you do…but did you know that more Republicans have been indicted and/or convicted of felonies in EVERY presidential administration since Nixon? Did you know this held true even when the Republicans were the minority party in Congress?

    Ah, but I forget! The Republicans are the family-values crowd…and us Dems, well, we’re SO corrupt!

    I should let you know – it might take a little while for me to compile the info again, but I can back up this claim.

  • cannonshop

    Glenn, you’re confusing inputs and outcomes here-the standard of living was higher BEFORE the high taxes, the High Taxes are an outcome of the high standard of living, not a cause or generator. (the taxes get added AFTER the standard of living improves.)

  • cannonshop

    #43 No, Glenn, the difference HERE, is that the Democrats want to increase taxes while not paying their share of the increase, then blame “The Rich” (which largely constitutes the people they see in their bathroom mirror in the morning) for…well, everything, but especially for not paying in.

    Basically, a Republican says “Taxes are too high”, and resents paying it, a Democrat says “Raise TAXES!!” but doesn’t pay in unless he’s forced to.

    Rangel WROTE the tax code he violated, Geithner’s the chief tax-collector and didn’t pay his until he was caught.

    It’s the difference between opposing it in the first place, and proposing it-but only for OTHER PEOPLE.

    If you can’t see the difference there, I’m sorry, I can’t help you any more with that.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    Ah, but I forget! The Republicans are the family-values crowd…and us Dems, well, we’re SO corrupt!

    Can I explain the difference between the GOP and the Demagogues in Congress? Newt Gingrich, GOP Speaker asked his wife for a divorce while she was in hospital being treated for cancer. John Edwards, Democrat Senator, drilled his bit outside the marital bed while his wife is dying of cancer. I figured I’d explain it in pop culture terms since people in this country understand Snookie from Jersey Shore better than Hillary, our Chief Diplomat.

    Oh, and by the way, did you see any difference? Mr. Speaker, I now surrender.

  • cannonshop

    #42 Silas, when the sun expands and devours the Earth (estimated to happen in about five billion years) it won’t be a time for Partisan Bickering. Now, on the other hand, is a PERFECT time for Partisan bickering-because we’re not all going to die horribly in a storm of fusing helium atoms and hard radiation.

    It’s fun, and as Sunday’s vote shows, it’s pointless fun-the Party of Government will do as they wish, and not a damn thing can be done about it.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    C-shop #44 –

    Am I? Then can you show me an example of a third-world country that improved to a high standard of living while keeping taxes very low? Even ONE?

    No, you can’t.

    However, I CAN show you this list of tax rates around the world. You’ll notice that NO first-world country has the low cumulative tax rate you support. There are third-world countries on the list with comparable tax rates…but if you’ve ever been to a third-world country (as I have many times), then you know quite well that tax collection is problematic at best.

    In other words, if taxes can’t be collected, then the people keep them as if they were taxed to begin with.

    So, WHY, then, is there NO example of a first-world country devolving into becoming a third-world country due to high taxes? Hm?

  • Baronius

    Silas, will you at least grant that 2007-2010 has seen unprecedented deficit spending? I know you want to put a pox on both parties, and the Republicans deserve some pox, but you can’t compare the fiscal damage they did to the current rate of spending. It does matter who’s running the House and Senate.

    If we’d return to federalism, I don’t think that lobbying would have as much influence. Companies wouldn’t get bailouts. National elections wouldn’t influence much more than foreign policy and the issuance of currency.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Silas –

    Look at the overall numbers of congressmen of which party has been indicted and/or corrupted more often than those of the other party…even when they’re in the minority…

    …and let me know what you find.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    C-shop –

    #43 No, Glenn, the difference HERE, is that the Democrats want to increase taxes while not paying their share of the increase, then blame “The Rich” (which largely constitutes the people they see in their bathroom mirror in the morning) for…well, everything, but especially for not paying in.

    So if that’s the case, then WHY is it that generally speaking, blue states pay MORE federal taxes than they receive back from the government, while red states pay LESS federal taxes than they receive from the government?

    You see, C-shop – you’re making that claim but you can’t back it up.

  • cannonshop

    Mostly, glenn, because the definitions get changed to prevent the label from being moved. In the 1950’s/early 1960’s median tax rates were around 3%, on that, the U.S. led the world in education, built the (Now crumbling) interstate highway system, led the world in tech development, standard of living, every catagory you could name.

    we went to the MOON on a lower median tax rate than we’ve got (as a percentage of GDP).

    Based on what’s coming out of our public schools, how our economy is doing (real world, not flogged and manipulated numbers), employment, and other objective standards, as our taxes have gone up, our ACTUAL standard of living has plunged-we’re on the edge of being a third world country right now.

    complete with the same kind of corrupt government you see in the Third World-just with more…refinements?

    MOST Of the third world got that way by being Debtor Nations, a good chunk of it was “First world Equivalent” a few decades to centuries ago…and user-fees aren’t much different from bribes save that the bribe goes directly to the civil servant, rather than being put in a pool for redistribution.

    study some damn history, Glenn.

  • cannonshop

    I’m going to ruminate and expand a bit, Glenn…

    During the 1970s and 1980s Third world countries bought things they didn’t need-jet fighters, huge palaces of government, limousines for officials, bodyguards… while they (at the same time) let their infrastructure rot. More than a few of them got in bed with foreign business interests whose operations didn’t contribute (positively) to making up the difference. many of them are also wracked by constant civil wars (either starting, ending, in the middle, or in between). That’s not a matter of tax policy, that’s a matter of a whole lot of OTHER things going on.

    High taxes don’t bring the stability and prosperity, High taxes often FOLLOW stability and prosperity, and encourage stagnancy which eventually leads to INstability (Weimar Republic? Soviet Union? heard of those? Pre-Franco Spain, perhaps?)

    Even high taxes isn’t enough-you also have to have chronic mismanagement and a governing class that feels itself to be exempt…kind of like we’re getting now.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    Glenn, indictments are a joke when tallied under respective party. Go beyond the barrier of party and look at the indicted individual’s relationship with their respective party. A trend emerges. The “problem children” get ferreted out, the staunch loyalists continue to slide unscathed. Cynical? You betcha!

    Silas, will you at least grant that 2007-2010 has seen unprecedented deficit spending?

    I concede. The “free for all” is a direct result of special interest gridlock in which we the people are the unwitting accomplices by virtue of how we shop, how we watch media and how we over extend ourselves. Madison Avenue, K Street and the White House all share the data. We’re just the holes in the keypunch cards which drive the system; we’ve been virtually reduced to 0’s and 1’s.

    Now, let me bring another item to the table. What if we did have another world war? Do any of you honestly believe we would prevail? What drove this nation during the two “great” wars? Our industry. Factory workers in Detroit made tanks. Weavers in Rhode Island wove blankets for the troops. Farmers in Iowa processed wheat to make the bread which nourished our young in the theater of war. The American consumer received rationing coupons for sugar, fuel and flour. Every American sacrificed regardless of station in life.

    We no longer have a manufacturing infrastructure. Look around your homes and communities. How much of that which takes up your lives was made in a nation far away? Are you willing to sacrifice just a hair for the sake of your nation? Be HONEST. Think about it. We’ve created a fantasy land where “all things are possible” but being self reliant as a nation is impossible. Our fuel, our clothes, our cars. What the hell will mothers do when the Pampers run out on the shelves? How many even KNOW how to make bread if need be? This country needs a leader with the balls of Jimmy Carter and the smugness of George Bush.

  • Baronius

    Silas, we didn’t have a lot of industry in place in 1917 or 1941. We built it. We did it by extracting coal and iron, polluting everything, no one sitting around at coffeehouses blogging about their angst. We could do that again if we had to.

  • Clavos

    We built it. We did it by extracting coal and iron, polluting everything, no one sitting around at coffeehouses blogging about their angst. We could do that again if we had to.

    And we should, but we won’t. This country lost its balls long ago (By getting its ass kicked in Vietnam, probably).

    Instead, our “leaders” will cater to the Third World Coalition (aka the UN and its IPCC), impose cap-and-trade legislation, and kill the pathetic remnant of an economy we have left, while China will continue to build a coal-fired electric plant a week, fueling an industrial infrastructure which will shortly be unrivaled by any country, least of all the USA, and will take our place as the economic powerhouse of the world.

  • http://cqpinion.blogspot.com/ Krutic A

    A ‘victory’ due to a compromise reached between the bribers and the bribees.

    Of course the Republicans and the American public remain to be convinced. But hey, at least now we know the going rate for a Bart Stupak and a Dennis Kucinich and everyone in between.

    Definitely what ‘change looks like’. Just not what people wanted or expected.

    Slogan for every Republican opponent in the November elections should be “How Much??”

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    Baronius: We could do that again if we had to.

    Clavos: And we should, but we won’t. This country lost its balls long ago (By getting its ass kicked in Vietnam, probably).

    Anybody see a common ingredient here? Richard M. Nixon. Had he not screwed up and completed his term, I honestly think we would have been alright. In the confused aftermath of Watergate, politics got very ugly and hasn’t cooled down.

    While I admire the faith of Baronius in believing Americans will step up in our darkest hour, I think we’ve passed over to a new era of rapid decline.

    We have no textile mills – they’ve been turned into housing for elderly voters. We have fewer steel mills – the unions bled that process dry. We import electricity while many of our power plants decay daily. We depend on greedy bastards around the world who have no sense of justice or morality to fuel our cars and heat our homes. While the USA is alleged to have the richest natural gas reserves, industry has failed to develop technologies to replace the dealers who are feeding our addiction. We buy, buy, buy at a frenzied rate placing ourselves deeper in debt. Yet the same people who are whining loudest about ObamaCare are the same people who have contributed significantly to the addiction.

    I don’t mean to make you all flaccid. I’m just trying, for one brief moment, to encourage you to think of what your grandchildren face when they reach our age. My friends, if you have a young child or grandchild, for the love of whichever God you believe, please think about what we leave behind. Let’s give them a fighting chance. Stop the ancient divides. Forget that which occurred yesterday. We have the talent and intelligence to rise above all of the old days by accepting history and rejecting the repetition of the same. Each of us has a moral obligation to the other. We share the same planet, folks. Deal with it.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    “Go Barack !
    Fight the Red-Neck HORDE !
    Keep up the Great Work !” -PulSamsara

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    cannonshop,

    Really, we all GET to buy Health Insurance, or else GET to pay a fine (and if you don’t pay the fine, of course, you GET to go to Jail…) try to focus on the positives, OK? : (

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I fins it hilarious how the conservatives – and here, Baronius comes to mind – as well as well-meaning liberals or would-be liberals, such as Glenn or our good ole friend here, Silas, happen to succumb to trivia and the usual jerking off.

    So I do thank you, Jeannie, for bringing this thread to its proper conclusion and inevitable sudden death.

    It’s barbarians at the gate, as the neglected BC poster had stated.

    We are fighting the horde, redneck or otherwise. It’s about time this little reminder sink in.

  • Clavos

    In the wake of the passage of that execrable bill, here’s an appropriate quote, from, interestingly enough, a 19th century French philosopher and Anarcho-Socialist:

    “To be GOVERNED is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. To be GOVERNED is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be place[d] under contribution, drilled, fleeced, exploited, monopolized, extorted from, squeezed, hoaxed, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, vilified, harassed, hunted down, abused, clubbed, disarmed, bound, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, derided, outraged, dishonored. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality.”

    Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, in his essay, “What Is Government?”

    A Frog. And an Anarcho-Socialist.

    Go figure.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    P4eodun was a nut. Worse yet, a hopeless idealist. But where do you fit?

    Are you for or against? What exactly is it that you’re espousing?

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Well, if you put it that way…”A nation under a well regulated government, should permit none to remain uninstructed. It is monarchical and aristocratical government only that requires ignorance for its support.” -Thomas Paine, Rights of Man, 1792

    : )

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Roger, Why do you blame me?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I don’t blame you. You just don’t go far enough.

  • zingzing

    clavos, what part of “anarcho” did you skip over when you were surprised? really.

  • zingzing

    a right-winger sees “socialist” and goes blind.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    Now, on the other hand, is a PERFECT time for Partisan bickering-because we’re not all going to die horribly in a storm of fusing helium atoms and hard radiation.

    IF and that’s a big IF, the Democrats would damn the torpedoes and proceed full speed ahead I would agree. The problem, CS, is that BOTH sides enjoy this public debate because it takes the voters attention away from the obvious.

    We have a government that is at peril. You all can express your doubts but the handwriting is on the wall. There may be no Republic for which we stand after 2012.

    as well as well-meaning liberals or would-be liberals, such as Glenn or our good ole friend here, Silas, happen to succumb to trivia and the usual jerking off…

    I’m not succumbing or jerking off. I am mad as Hell and will not take it any more! The extremes on both sides are well funded while the rest of us in the middle are just doing our best to trudge through to the next check. We’re funding the political machinery in Washington with every single purchase we make, every union due we pay and with every medical service we receive. As piece of each dollar we spend trickles its way up to Washington and into the hands of a lobbyist.

    Sorry, folks. If we take all that campaign finance money out of the equation, the National Debt doesn’t look so bad after all.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    a right-winger sees “socialist” and goes blind.

    So many ways of approaching this, and such little time. If a right winger sees a male socialist he usually widens his stance in the stall or just does what he needs to do to facilitate the blindness.

  • zingzing

    right winger: “so, i think we need to turn right on main street.”
    left winger: “i think so. what’s the street before that?”
    right winger: “liberty.”
    left winger: “right, liberty street. what did we just pass?”
    right winger: “freedom.”
    left winger: “ok. freedom blvd. alright, so it’s another 4 blocks.”
    right winger: “right. right.”
    left winger: “hey look at those kids!”
    right winger: “where?”
    left winger: “eyes on the road, buddy. no, no we just passed a school. looks like the kids were getting out of their spring social…”
    right winger: “IST! SOCIALIST!” *whack, whack, whack whackwhackwhackwhack*
    left winger: “oh shit, look out for grandma!”

    sorry, that was difficult.

  • Clavos

    clavos, what part of “anarcho” did you skip over when you were surprised? really.

    Ah, zing, why do you so often miss my points?

    My surprise is that I, a Libertarian, find myself in complete agreement (on this one point at least) with an anarcho-socialist. And a friggin’ frenchy, at that!

    What delicious irony!

    When do we start overthrowing the government?

    I’m ready…

  • zingzing

    ready for what… clueless over here…

    that was a joke. up there. that. a paragraph above. there. sorry if i missed your point. my mistake.

    you really want to overthrow the government? you sound like me in 2002. except i was 22 then. young and able. (not to overthrow the gov’t or anything, but able for something, i guess.)

    you agree with the french on a lot of points. maybe not politically, but if you look at it, they’re just people. with bigger noses. and hotter women. and a really nice capitol. and some fine wine. really, they got it made. who are you to look down on them? hot women, nice booze, cool city. fuck off, that’s what they’d say, in their froggy way.

  • Clavos

    Well, see ya got all their good points listed in one sentence — short list.

    I don’t care enough about ’em to argue with you about it, if you like ’em, I’m OK with it.

    Oh, and by the way: I don’t think they have a capitol.

  • Clavos

    “Overthrowing the government” was used mostly (but not entirely) as a figure of speech. I’m not advocating warfare (already had my bellyful of that), but I would support in a heartbeat anyone with a serious plan to start dismantling most of the monster in D.C.

    Fat chance.

  • Baronius

    Clavos, that brings up the matter of the GOP nomination in 2012. I wonder how the debate over health care reform has affected the race. My guesses:

    – Palin moved up. She’s become the queen of populism. She’s consolidated her clout among a segment of the population, but made no inroads among those that hate her.
    – Romney fell. The public is left with the impression that the Massachusetts health care experiment failed. No current or former governor made the case for state-level reform.
    – Paul Ryan emerged as a policy nerd to watch. 2012 might be too soon for him. John Boehner looked like a leader, but probably not a national leader. Eric Cantor did a yeoman’s job, but didn’t take the stage at all. Ron Paul showed why he’s arguably the least important person in the House.
    – No one has shone in the Senate. Scott Brown has some buzz, but that’s not going to last. If Lamar Alexander were younger (he’s 70), 2012 would probably have been his best chance. He never got the timing right.
    – If people want to get rid of Washington politicians, it can only help General Petraeus.

    I know we all hate how long the presidential campaigns have become, but we’re all politics junkies around here, so why not speculate?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Comments Editor,

    Please look into the source of comments #61 and #63 as to where they originated from. They do not appear to be mine, especially #63.

  • zingzing

    “Oh, and by the way: I don’t think they have a capitol.”

    but we have our nazi. as you can clearly see that was 5:30 am.

    women, booze and cities are three of my favorite things. music (french ok), food (french good, if salty) and… well, i can’t think of a 6th thing that really matters much to me. i’m forgetting something, i’m sure.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    When do we start overthrowing the government?

    Well, I don’t know about you, Clav, but isn’t the government rather heavy? I might be able to pick it up if you grabbed hold of the other end, but as for throwing it anywhere… :-(

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    You know, the last time we had a General in the Oval Office things got done. Perhaps Petraeus is a good idea. A military junta in Washington? Don’t ask, do tell.

  • cannonshop

    #80 Last time we had a General in the Oval Office, the country wasn’t bankrupt.

  • Jordan Richardson

    We did it by extracting coal and iron, polluting everything, no one sitting around at coffeehouses blogging about their angst.

    Aww, damn bloggers. Ruining everything with their talking about issues and “whining” about pollution and other inconsequential “side effects” to production. Damn them. Damn them to hell.

  • cannonshop

    #82 Jordon, generally you don’t see conservatives driving smoke-belching, oil-leaking forty-year-old Vanagons, or ill maintained ‘drippy’ Volvos with the obligatory greenpeace sticker on their rusty bumpers.

    A walk through the faculty parking lot at EVCC turned up a lot of rolling stock that qualifies as an EPA nightmare-notably (perhaps ironically) with rear deck and bumpers festooned with the Leftist flavour of the week.

    Then again, I never saw so many SUV’s as I did when they held a rally ‘for the environment’, along with aforesaid clunkers and pseudo-economy cars.

    Generally, when a Conservative’s driving a Piece of shit car, it’s because he or she actually CAN’T afford a better ride, and it’s probably as well maintained as the owner is capable, unlike Lefties who “Just get in and go until it breaks, then call the tow-truck.”

    It’s only my own observation, but the Left is made of Hypocrisy-and Hypocrisy never cleaned ANYTHING up.

  • cannonshop

    Then again, I’m a member of the generation that proved that stoned hippies can’t use a condom effectively.

  • Jordan Richardson

    You’re also a member of the generation that apparently can’t get past dividing people into lefts and rights or democrats and conservatives. It’s too bad that your worldview, like the worldviews of so many around here, is so damned partisan.

    But if you think your generalizations actually manage to accomplish anything, by all means cling to them. If it makes life easier for you to divide people into “others,” go right ahead.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer/dan_miller Dan(Miller)

    Even India and Pakistan can agree on something, like how to close their borders at night. I suggest that each evening, the House and Senate have similar ceremonies. The Democrats could be India, and the Republicans Pakistan; or vice versa, it doesn’t matter.

    Dan(Miller)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Perhaps they should associate more often after or between hours, like for six lunch- martinis.

    It used to do wanders when I worked on Wall Street.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer/dan_miller Dan(Miller)

    Roger, In the interest of post-partisan compromise and good will, I think we should implement both ideas. To do the things displayed in the video it is probably useful to be reasonably sober. Let’s have closing ceremonies at the beginning of Congressional lunch breaks and opening ceremonies following lunch breaks, and adapt the India-Pakistan border closing ceremony to fit. That way, the world (or at least those with nothing better to do than watch) could see who was sober before and then after lunch.

    It could turn into a great tourist attraction for Washington, and bring in some money to fund the metro system or, perish the thought, schools.

    Dan(Miller)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    From my experience, no one’s sober after lunch – that’s the whole idea.

    You might appreciate though the following piece by Tony Blankley.

    I may disagree with the slavery analogy, especially as regards “socialism,” but he may be on target when it comes to portraying the severity of the rift.

    (Forgive the misspelling: ought to be “wonder.”)

  • Zedd

    Braden:

    Are you for health insurance companies being allowed to deny people coverage because of preexisting conditions—or to drop coverage when people become sick?

  • Zedd

    Braden:

    Are you against health insurance being more affordable to small businesses through tax credits?

  • Zedd

    Braden:

    Are you against seniors on Medicare paying less for their prescriptions?

    I’ll await your response.

  • Clavos

    Are you against health insurance being more affordable to small businesses through tax credits?

    Are you against seniors on Medicare paying less for their prescriptions?

    I am if I’m forced to make up the difference.

    I’m opposed to seniors who are not impoverished being given a discount simply for having lived a bit longer.

  • Zedd

    Clav,

    Let me help you…

    Knowing that Americans don’t save. That 80+ percent of baby boomers don’t have more than 2 month’s living wage saved. How relevant is your argument (or parsing).

    What about dumping people from their insurance when they get sick? You against that???

  • Clavos

    Zedd, I know literally dozens of people who have medicare and a net worth in excess of $5M. Nearly every client over 65 I’ve had in ten years of selling yachts fits that description.

  • Clavos

    You’re not consistent, Zedd. on the one hand, you (and practically all the liberals on these threads) decry the greediness of the rich and how they don’t pay their fair share of taxes, yet when I suggest they shouldn’t be allowed government subsidized health insurance you tell me I’m parsing.

  • Clavos

    Which, while I’m at it, is a misuse of the verb to parse.

  • Zedd

    Clav,

    You are analysing in a minute way. Focus.

    How many rich retirees use Medicare? Numbers dude, then we will talk and you can accuse everyone you like, of not being consistent.

  • Clavos

    One is too many, Zedd.

    It’s a matter of principal, not numbers.

    And they aren’t “abusing,” they are entitled.

    But shouldn’t be.

    How many rich retirees use Medicare?

    All of them. They didn’t get rich by being stupid.

  • STM

    Dan: “Even India and Pakistan can agree on something, like how to close their borders at night.”

    Yep. Your’re right. The guards even shake hands before the barriers go down. Then they go back to slagging each other off and threatening to blow each other up.

    Then the next night they’re back it, marching up and down, saluting, shaking hands …

    I don’t know which of the two is scarier. Even the Poms don’t lift their feet that high when they halt.

  • Baronius

    STM, I was thinking about you when I was watching that video. (Thanks for putting it up, Dan.) The Brits managed to spread their unique combination of practicality and eccentricity across their Empire, and the world is better for it.

  • STM

    Baron: ” … and the world is better for it”.

    Geez mate, I dunno. That might be stretchin’ it a bit.

  • Baronius

    STM, of the great colonizing powers, only the Brits left behind working models for governance. I thought that was your big thing. Honestly, I’m stunned that you would react to my statement with anything less than a proper salute.

  • STM

    Except I’m not British :) Like many of us, I have dual citizenship but I’m Australian.

    I’m not that keen on them running anything, but you’re right … in that colonising (or settling) era, they DID leave something.

    In some cases it was just a railway, or a sense of justice, but in the case of places like the US and Australia, it was the fundamental building blocks of modern democracy for a political system allied with free speech, personal liberties, rights held to be instrinsic and free-market capitalism.

    As Winston Churchill said of that beast: “Democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”

    America is a great example.

    In 10 years’ time, you’ll be asking yourselves on healthcare: “This is OK, why didn’t we go even further”.

  • STM

    And let’s not forget the real protector of all our freedoms. That hoary old chestnut: Rule of law.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    We’re lacking the necessary ingredient in maintaining that rule of law, Stan — the House of Windsor. (Sorry, I saw “hoary old chestnut” and thought of Phillip Mountbatten.)

  • Zedd

    Baronius,

    “The Brits managed to spread their unique combination of practicality and eccentricity across their Empire, and the world is better for it.”

    What do you mean by this statement?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    There were some notable exceptions, Zedd, Lord Mountbatten, for instance.

    The Brits are known for their sense of fairness and fair play – aside from being human like all of us.

  • Zedd

    roger,

    So they taught their “subjects” fair play?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I don’t know about that, Zedd. But some aspect of the English rule in India, especially under Lord Mountbatten on the even of the English withdrawal, compare quite favorably with the practices of other colonial powers.

  • Zedd

    Since most posters come from a “Europeanized” vantage point, it is only responsible to state things that pertain to all of humanity with a caveat. One should acknowledge the massive blind spot with regard to the social, anthropological and cultural development of the enumerable cultures of the world. In past centuries it was acceptable to assign tags and labels to things in order to place oneself at the center of the universe. People traveled and came back with tall tales that (off course) made them look good (smarter, more innovative, more interesting, etc) and so it was assumed that those travelers were superior to those that they encountered. It That would happen because if the returned travelers were superior, then it would mean that their countrymen would also be superior, so the tall tales of the European teacher to the world were easily acceptable at home.

    We’ve been catapulted into a larger view of the globe just recently and cant really have too many private conversations about our amazingness without being challenged, corrected, or in the extreme, attacked (by fed up terrorists). Thus, we now must strive to be more sophisticated in our understanding that there is so much more that we don’t know that is relevant the people of planet Earth. The simplistic, self promoting, lazy and naive Euro-centric world view is sorta no longer forgivable.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “. The simplistic, self promoting, lazy and naive Euro-centric world view is sorta no longer forgivable. ”

    I hope you’re not accusing me, Zedd, of advocating European ethnocentrism. I was making a comparative statement about colonial powers.

    One could make a similar argument that the Roman Empire under Augustus wasn’t the worst possible arrangement (if we manage to overlook the rather inconvenient fact that Rome happened to rule.) Historians still talk today of Pax Romana.

  • STM

    Zedd, you swing in the breeze … one moment you’re praising the British, the next bollocking them.

    Whatever anyone thinks about the colonial era, or which America too was a part (the Philippines was a US colony for a start), the mass movement of people across borders into the territory of others, often by force, has been going on since the birth of man.

    There’s no point taking the black-armband view of history Zedd … what is, is. Simple.

  • Zedd

    roger,

    No I wasn’t referring to you. But now that you’ve brought it up… we are all ethnocentric but the important thing is to acknowledge it as apposed to insisting that what we state is fact (where it relates to matters of world history that pertain to the entire world) as apposed to your perspective on what is real

    STM,

    I was not directing the comments against the Brits. I was directing my comments at those who cant imagine a complex, DILIBERATE world with interesting structures and rituals, some comical and purposeful, that don’t involve European influence. To state things overly simple…. We are not that complicated/unique as human beings. It’s not that difficult to imagine that most innovations have been considered and enacted by other parties at some other part of the globe. The fact that we don’t know that the acts have taken place doesn’t mean that they haven’t.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Zedd, just a quick response.

    My comment was historically-conditioned. Fifty years or hundred years ago we weren’t quite aware of the “evils” ethnocentrism to the same exact extent we are aware of it today. That’s why different standards apply to our historical past, and I believe my comment were trying to reflect those standards and thus be true to the past.

    Today, with globalism and multiculturalism around the corner, the idea of nation-states about to become obsolete, all bets are off. And this goes for ethnocentrism of any kind.

    If my explanation leaves you wondering, let me know and I’ll try to do better tomorrow.