It seems appropriate to start the "new year" with perspectives I would like to present on this blog for the coming year. These are topics that are at the forefront of my thoughts right now.
Currently the U.S. presidential election campaigns are in full force. Although I don't want to get sucked into the rhetoric coming from all sides, I do want to cover the longer term issues that have surfaced and stirred the passions on various sides.
In talking to people of various political opinions it becomes obvious that most Americans share similar and compatible core values. We cherish our children, try to respect those we encounter and shun violence. Yet when it comes to political debate some of the nicest people lose reason and civility. This line of thought leads me to consider my own positions which defy the simplistic categorizations. This led me to look up the definitions of "conservative" and "liberal" at Webster Dictionary's online site. The result is fairly long winded and thorough. The site takes care to point out that terms such as "conservative" and "right wing" are not synonymous and can in fact be opposites. Oddly enough the "conservative" page has a list of prominent popular conservatives and the "liberal" site does not. The material that seems most relevant is:
In the United States and western Europe, conservatism is generally associated with the following views:Personal responsibility.
General opposition to "big government" policies or state economic interventionism .
Anti-communism, including a belief that the former Soviet Union was an "evil empire".
Support for Judeo-Christian religious and moral values.
Support for strong law enforcement and strong penalties for crimes.
Restraint in taxation and regulation of businesses.
Support for a strong military, and well-defended protected borders
Support for drug prohibition.
Restraint in many state-run social programs such as welfare and medical care.
Opposition to abstract and allegedly unequitable policies such as affirmative action and progressive taxation.
The key characteristics of classical liberalism are:The importance of the individual
Freedom
Reason
Justice
Toleration and diversity
Both definitions contain a respect for the individual and freedom from excessive government interference. The whole definitions also call out that political liberalism is about reform and change whereas political conservatism is about preserving the 'best' in society and resisting radical change. From this perspective I embrace both sides, culture is slow changing, but there is a need for change. History teaches us that some of the radical changes such as Nazism and Soviet Socialism were 'sold' as positive reforms but were monsterous creations that sought to crush the human spirit. We have to consider how to safeguard ourselves from similar outcomes, modern day programs have similar dangers. I have seen first hand how the good intentions of welfare programs have destroyed families and created a culture of dependency (upon drugs and the state).
It is also obvious that 'classic liberalism' is not being promoted by the 'Left', the modern term 'progressive' is a thinly veiled reference to socialism and state domination which I believe most Americans (rightly) reject. My experiences on Kibbutz gives me pretty good insight into the potential of communism and socialism. In a small society such as a Kibbutz or even a family, these systems are able to work, in a larger society the corruption of power is too hard for rulers to resist. (Personally I believe this is due to the personal nature of interactions in a small group, you know and respect the people too well.) I don't feel threatened by the 'Right' since they as a group don't seem to be interested in wielding power. The success of our government seems to be in the balance of power between the conservative and liberal perspectives. Right now we seem to be out of balance because the two major parties are not representing these two forces. The Democratic party is struggling with their identity, are they liberals or are they socialists? The current drive toward the 'popular vote' and away from the two party system is a mistake. Look at other democracies which have more popular representation, such as Israel, and notice the unequal influence of niche parties, most citizens there recognize the undue influence those small groups have and see a need to reform their system.
It is no wonder that the majority of our population does not vote, most people just don't have an interest in politics and realize that politics is full of corruption and deceit. It is our civic duty however to engage our minds and to ensure that our children develop critical thinking skills.
Other things I would like to cover:
Reviews and thoughts of books, presentations and various concepts that I come across.
I am currently reading Ben Stein's "Can America Survive?",
studying French, (we'll see how helpful this was when I go to France this weekend)
and pondering Thomas Barnett's works. (right now considering the parallels in Info Sec)
The broadcasts on BookTV on the weekend of Sept 11 provided an interesting juxtaposition:
Eric Brende - Better Off: Flipping the Switch on Technology
(goes off grid - time saving devices consume our time - limit technology - life better with less technology)
Paul Driessen - Eco-Imperialism
Starts out with a treatise on the benefit of technology, especially the need to help Africa combat malaria and disease using DDT and the death and impoverishment 1st world environmental activists have wrought.
Also:
Underlying causes of antagonism toward globalization
- Muslim's fear of women turning into our MTV images?
- US concerns about losing jobs?
The conflict between faith and science (Tower of Babel syndrome?)
Recent Comments