Damifino - I'm trying to figure out what kind of society AM and others like him envision - it sounds a lot like the Nazis' visions of a super race, without any tolerance for deviation from what is deemed 'correct' behavior.
Well I'm trying to figure out where these civilized societies exist, not what AMonger is trying to say. I got his message, and like mine, I differ on the idea what society should and should not do. I don't see anything outside the abstract world of political ideology or books like Brave New World.
We seem to forget one important factor involved here, we don't have poverty and we don't have people starving in the streets. We are a society that is twisted but refuses to turn people away, the reason why so many will give to someone begging on the street but won't give to their local charity.
I think the point that he makes is the same I'm making, government's job is not to take care of us but to allow us to take care of ourselves. This seems to be the structure of what was and it seems that people can't seem to get a grip on the what could be of all of it.
Once there were communities that did take care of their own, it wasn't publicized or talked about much if at all. If you wanted to have help, there were things called mutual aid societies because until poverty was defined by the elite, we all stuck together.
The funny thing, I mean the rather bad and laughable thing is that we went from a point of being close to that civilized society that you speak of to something that is so far removed from it that it is sad - all because we don't demand people working as groups but view the need to maintain themselves as isolated individuals.
Like, if you have no savings [maybe because it went for medical bills] and no family [or none who is willing to help] then you have to let the Salvation Army [or whatever 'charity' you find] preach at you - because that's the cost of 'free' religious charity. [ Which is one reason so many homeless refuse to go to shelters - they don't care for the religion being shoved down their throats in return for a bowl of soup. Can't say I blame 'em, either.]
Well you know, that's an excuse. To accept charity without a hitch goes back to my point of how we view the problems as individual problems and make allowances for those who want to be individuals.
I know a fact that not all bed and breakfast places offer religious services as a mandatory payment for the service, so I would think that if an individual is starving by their own accord, they have no reason to complain about what the place does or says to them as long as they are fed and sheltered.
And the "Marxist" retort? That's got to be the lamest defense of an indefensible practice EVER.....
Actually is it a very good one. The reason goes back to my first point, where are the civilized societies outside the political ideology?
There are none.
We are people who have a responsibility to each other, and as the people, we must maintain that the work that is done is not done by our government but by the people. Our government, like many others is a cold heartless entity that exists not to be charitable but to protect us from the outside world of other governments, and we allow that government to exist for that reason, not to food or cloth someone.
