Tuesday, January 20, 2004

Who the Hell Cares What I Think? Or, Us and Dem

Us and Dem

That's what it basically boils down to. In America, you have a great series of political parties, economic policies, social policies etc... You have the democrats, the republicans, libertarians, objectivists, and to a lesser degree, socialists aka/commies. Then you can break it down into further sub-catagories such as conservative, liberal whatever. We're gonna keep this simple and stick with the two major parties. The Dems and the Pubs. It's easier that way, and honestly most of the others are very similar to and may even fall under the republican platform (libertarians, objectivists whatever). How it really breaks down is which side of "center" the particular ideology falls under. What is the center? Well, in theory it would be the independent, completely non-partisan ideal. Since you and I both know no such a thing exists, and if it did it would probably be the equivalent of anarchy, we are just going to call it the dividing line between the left and the right. Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, every political ideology out there falls under either the left or the right. On the left you have the liberals, socialists, communists (the same thing really, just to lesser degrees). On the right you have the conservatives, libertarians, objectivists etc. Basically any ideal that says the government should stay the heck out of our lives and out of our pockets. The leftists believe that the government should have a larger role in the lives of its people. I am kind of generalizing when I say Dem and us, because you can be a Dem without being a Lib. They are just very rare, so for the sake of this post, I am putting them together. In fact I'm going to make it even simpler by putting everything on the right into the "republican" category, and everything on the left in the "democrat" category.

So with that in mind, what exactly makes a democrat and a republican. Well, let's take it down to the simplest parts. Just look at the names. Democrats want a democracy, republicans believe in a (say it with me now) republic. Yes it really is that simple. The democrats are always hyping the "will of the people" and contend that a majority should rule. Republicans believe in the power of a republic, and that people elect "officials" who then make decisions which they feel are in the best interest of the country. Well, what about the majority? I mean, a majority rule sounds right doesn't it? Shouldn't the good of the many be put above the good of the one? (sorry Spock) The problem with that is, you run into a little thing known as "tyranny of the majority". WTF? Tyranny of the majority? How can a majority rule be tyranny if the it's what the majority wants? Allow me to explain. Here's a an extreme example but it will make the point nicely. Imagine that there is a massive, global wide disaster. There are 100 survivors out of the entire human race (who all happen to be in the same place, shut up this is my fantasy...well in my fantasy I would be the only male surrounded my 99 gorgeous fem....uhm, never mind. Don't tell my wife I said that) Now of that 100 people, 70 of them are white, 30 are black. Now let's say that 65 of the whites are racist buggers and decide that the black survivors should be made to serve the white survivors, or even worse put to death. Why? Because the majority said so. Now that's not to say there isn't a danger in the form of a republic either. If you have elected officials who decide that genocide is something that they might like, well you get the idea. Which is why we don't have ONE elected official, we have many. Many that can override each other. Now this does sometimes result in some serious political deadlocks and what-have-you, but in the end it's necessary. It's also why we have 3 separate branches of government, along with the checks and balances system. Anything taken to an extreme is potentially a bad thing. Control to and extreme is tyranny. Freedom to an extreme is anarchy. The bottom line is, with a republic, in which we elect our officials to finite terms (in the cases of governership of presidency, I am of the opinion that all elected positions should have term limits), to make decisions in the best interest of the country, meaning they are there to protect the individual rights of it's citizens. So now that we've covered the main differences in the foundations of the two parties, let's look a little deeper. What does each side (left and right) feel is best for it's citizens. The left believes that the govt has not only the responsibility, but actually the right to govern the everyday goings of not only private businesses, but private citizens as well. They feel the govt should regulate everything to how much a person makes, to how many of a particular ethnic group are in a particular company/college, to even how a parent can and cannot raise their own children. The right on the other hand, is based on the ideals of the founding fathers. The govt has no business in our lives or in private business. It can collect taxes ONLY for the purpose of funding a military. Nothing else. Everything else should be left to the individual. The federal government really was designed with no other purpose in mind. Over the years, liberalism/socialism has seeped in and begun to overtly take over other areas, retirement, health care, making sure those "evil corporations" pay you fairly. The founding fathers believe, as I do, that the American people are and always will be perfectly capable of governing themselves. Sure, you have sh**heads that will try to take advantage of others. There is nothing you can do about that. They will always be there, and in the end, if left to their own devices they will almost always be weeded out.