Friday, May 17, 2013

Big Bang v. Evolution

Think about this: if the maximum possible organization was only available at the initial moments of the big bang, and the universe has been under the law of entropy since; science has just vacated any and all theories that rely on unassisted organization. The accretion disc theory of the solar system, expansionism, and evolution comes to mind immediately. Since the universe was brought into being at the big bang more organized than we see it now, there is no need for evolution.

Saturday, May 4, 2013

How do you treat the poor?

There are two political camps in the nation, and most of the world, today. Each says they are taking care of the poor. Each claims to be compassionate, so what is the difference.  As I see it the two factions have a different way of treating the poor.

The Conservative View:

The poor are people, just like you and I, they need to be respected. We all have access to the goods from Nature, they are equally available to all, one only needs to avail themselves to them through labor.  We do not harvest food crops unless we have planted and watered them. Each person is entitled to enjoy the fruits of their labor, this means that some may attain more if they labor more. It is not greedy to possess and appreciate what ones' hard work has acquired.

A conservative tells a poor person, I will give you a job, I cannot pay you very much at the beginning, but you will be able to work your way up, and earn more as time goes by: a concept known as upward mobility.  It is always hard at first, but with much hard work, training, experience, and time even the lowest can move up. Through a job the indigent gain self-respect, knowledge, confidence, reputation, and private property.

Natural law allows for one to accumulate wealth, and as long as he does not allow what he can accumulate to be of no use to himself or anyone else, then there is no limit to what he can procure.  In other words, if I work on a farm and grow tomatoes, I am allowed to eat as many tomatoes as I want, I am allowed to can as many tomatoes as I can. I am also able to barter with others to access what I do not have myself. And being able to save for the future is not only right, it is admirable.

This philosophy has been extolled by John Locke, Cicero, Thomas Paine and the Founding Fathers. It is not possible to demand that human nature change to accommodate society. Society needs to account for human nature and adapt it to the betterment of society.

The Progressive View:

The poor are people, just like you and I, they need to be taken care of. Those of us who have taken advantage of the goods that Nature has given us, need to share our bounty with everyone fairly. No one person or group should be allowed to hoard their yield, the whole of the goods that Nature provides are for the benefit of all in society. Not everyone is capable of attaining the same access to Nature, so those who have greater capability must give up the excess that they can access to give to those who cannot.

The progressive tells the poor person, I am sorry you do not have the same access, you can go to the government and they will give you what they think you need. You shouldn't have to work to provide for yourself, you are entitled to certain basic needs, including shelter, water/food, and (under current era thinking) health care, education, clothing, safety, unionization, reproduction, affirmative action, and tolerance.

No one person or group is allowed to have anything private, everything (including offspring, life, work, and even your identity) belongs to the state and the state will divvy it up "fairly." The state is the only entity that understands what is for the good of society, and those who make up the state determine what "fair" distribution is. When everyone is given their needs, there is no necessity for further striving or excess. The whole of human society will recognize that and will conform to the constraints of the statists for the good of society.

A philosophy borrowed heavily from Thomas Moore, Plato, Marx, Machiavelli and Hobbes.  It is necessary for man to change his nature to accommodate society. Only when all men are provided for equally will there no longer be any contentions between parties.

The future of the world is the treasure in this prize-fight. On one side is Freedom, the other side Slavery. I for one will choose the path of freedom.

Thursday, May 2, 2013

Dissent of Government is patriotic

For those who think that criticizing the Obama regime is a felony I leave you with this:

Hillary Clinton at her most shrill. But for once she is right!