Hierarchy of Significance

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.

Utopia,is it really what we want?

The liberal Democrats have wanted a Utopian society for a very long time, they have worked hard and been patient. Working behind closed doors, making incrementally small steps, and keeping their agenda in the face of the public for so long. Now they have somehow, through some miracle of timing and charisma, gotten their wish. They have the government and media all in their corner, they have all the power and now they can make the big moves that will lead this country to Utopia. So what has happened? Why is there such an furor? Doesn't the population understand?

I don't think the liberals fully understand themselves what they are trying to do. This is the 1960's hippie generation finally seeing their beliefs take center stage; "give peace a chance," "why can't we all just get along" have been their mantras for a very long time. The Beatles songs, and specifically John Lennon, all talked about a world were there is no disagreement. In Utopia there is never any conflict between people, there is no upper nor under class, there is no unequal distribution of wealth, no hunger, no sadness, no pain. So now that those with this ideology are in power, why has it not just all fallen into place?

Do you liberals really understand what Utopia is? In the novel Of the Best State of a Republic, and of the New Island Utopia by Sir Thomas More, we catch a glimpse of a perfect society, where all evil has been removed from the society. Everything is equal for everyone, and nobody is allowed to be better than anyone else. Oh how wonderful and amazing such a world would be. HUH!? Not as I see it.

In Utopia there are no connections between people, you don't have any differences between peoples, everyone wears the same clothes, no individuality is allowed. All the houses are the same, the blocks all the same, the city streets all look the same; your yard looks like everyone else's yard, you drive the same car as everyone else. Your job is chosen for you, everyone receives the exact same education, there is no innovation, no progress. People have sex with anyone they want at any time they can, they have children out of wedlock (there is no institution of marriage). Hillary Clinton claims that you need a village to raise a child, well guess what this is where she got that idea, since there is no need for parents, a woman gives birth and the child becomes a member of the village, everyone takes care of the babies (or nobody, as is wont to happen more often than the other situation).

And since everyone receives the exact same education, there are no scientists, no doctors, no lawyers, no rulers. Do you liberals understand this, in your ideal society, you are done away with? Nobody will know if there is another Einstein amongst them because no one is allowed to excel above anyone else, no one is allowed to have talents different than everyone else. This is a society of mediocrity, STAGNANCY. All the liberals, with their agenda become just like everyone else. No one is allowed to prosper at the expense of someone else. No labor union bosses living off the dues of members, no lawyers representing the little guy suing the other little guy and sucking them both dry, no doctors to take care of the sick, no plumbers to deal with indoor plumbing (just think what that means, outdoor potties yup); indeed there is no specialization of any kind. And there is no need for a media of any kind, since there is never anything new happening to report on, everyday is just like the last day; the only thing that changes is the seasons and the weather.

Our current liberals all believe that because they hold this ideal agenda, they are somehow better than all the rest. And if only we would shut up and let them lead, we could all live in a perfect society. Well guess what, there are even more problems with the so called "ideal/Utopian" society than I have outlined. The main problem is human nature, all humans want self-determination - the right to be themselves, and make their own decisions; but there is none of this allowed in the ideal society. Everyone gives up their own personal rights for the good of society, including the liberals who think they are better than everyone else, and who want to determine for everyone else what is the ideal society.

And this is the road the liberals want to take us down.