WHAT IS LIBERAL?
I had received an interesting response to one of my posts on a blog, called The Global Warming Swindle, the response was called “lets respond to this arrogant liberal” Now I find this very interesting because I have often wondered if people now truly know what a liberal is and what they actually stand for. I have asked myself am I a liberal? By today’s standards probably not. How about conservative am I that? No not that, so what would I consider myself and what ‘category’ do I fall under? These are questions I asked myself and the findings I have found very interesting. One of the other reasons I wanted to write this short paper is in order to have people understand a little more about what it means to be liberal or libertarian and where those words came from.
It is a big mistake to just clump people into these categories in the popular “line spectrum” for their political beliefs; this is a gross misrepresentation of a person’s political beliefs. The line spectrum usually looks something like this
LEFT/Liberal------------------------------------------RIGHT/Conservative
This is an archaic way of showing a person’s political beliefs, even if your 5th grade history teacher taught it to you this way, as mind did. It is important for people to understand these terms in order to know where they stand and help them make the correct decisions according to their proper beliefs.
First off I’d like to go over what a liberal is now and what they were meant to be. Liberal, in the classical sense of the word, simply means a “hands off” or Laissez-faire, policy. We were called by our forefathers a “liberal democracy” we were literally founded on a laissez-faire economic policy, although we were never completely laissez-faire as I’m sure everyone now is away.
At the beginning of our government and for about the first 150 years (give or take 30 years) we were very much close to being lassiez-faire, and we became the biggest industrial power on earth, ended slavery and began giving rights to everyone. We were of course not perfect, nor can any system done by humans be. It was our “liberalism” that initiated our success and les us to be the greatest power on earth. It was our “liberalism” that attracted million of foreigners to come to America for the opportunity of a better life.
Please note the word opportunity not promise. This is the case today, many people come here not for an opportunity to become better but because they can now leech off of other more productive people. A poor person can loot the wealth of a richer person through means of welfare and Medicaid and other such programs. Because there are far more workers then there are business owners it is easy for a worker to gain political pull and force pressure upon politicians to put regulations in place to constrict a business owner from doing his or her job properly in order to help the worker. This works under the assumption that being a worker is more important to the success of a company then does being the company owner. It is important to remember without the owner there would be no jobs for workers to complain about not being paid enough for.
A “Rights Theorist Libertarian” which is what I consider myself understands that everyone has a right to his or her own life and should be allowed to do any such thing that they so please as long as it does not infringe on the rights of another human being. Workers have the right to gather together and strike if they feel they should be paid more for their services. They do not however have a right to go to the government to force the business to pay them more. We are entitled to our rights of “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” people do not have the right to reach into someone’s pocket to help them be happy.
America was founded on the idea that government was to play a minimal role in the affairs of society and the economy. That the job of the government was not to provide a direction for society or the economy, but simply to maintain a “free environment” where the public could conduct themselves as they so chose, as long as they didn’t “infringe’ on the “rights’ of others (www. Rationalrevolution.net)
As was stated earlier America was founded on government playing a referee, its only job is to ensure the rights of the individual. The American Government was so successful because for the first time in the history of mankind a country was founded in reason, logic and the full use of the mind. Not as has always been before, by tribal warfare, religious indoctrination and other such savage ways of the origins of all other countries on earth. America started out with reason.
That was a brief overview of “liberal” and where the word came from in America. And it was extremely brief as there have been many books on the subject. The word has changed, today the concept of liberal is that of a “leftist” which is today associated with big government and economic regulation. Also with different forms of “progressive” taxation and social policies. This does include such things as “gay rights” and unlimited free speech which in fact are very liberal concepts. But big business and progressive taxes are not. It has been clumped with the “leftist/liberal” concept, the true left and the true right, uses governments to pass certain policies in order to promote certain viewpoints and agendas. Again a government is merely supposed to be the referee and never to take sides on any issue, especially issues that can take the individual rights away from a certain group of people. Whether those are the rights of the bum on the street or the billionaire in his mansion. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness” Everyone not the poor or the needy at the expense of the rich and prosperous.
This can continue for a long time, beginning to understand the Democrats and what they stand for as well as republicans. The best political spectrums are not ones that clump everyone into one of two categories but one that shows all the different categories people fall in. Before people can make decisions on which politician or policy to vote for. They need to know what they actually stand for what type of world they should be fighting for. In other words a philosophy which helps integrates their values into concretes.
On a personal note, I stand for fairness, justice, equality and the only moral economic system, capitalism. A system which outlaws force of any kind. People have often say I am skeptical of many things people have considered the norm. Which I take a great compliment I am skeptical of any man, woman or organization that claims to be putting into action certain things that take way any individuals’ rights and to claim it is in the best interest of society to do so. I understand people’s rights to disagree with me, and accept them. I appreciate a healthy argument on our different viewpoints. We must never forget that America is not just a marketplace for different products, it is a marketplace of ideas, the government’s role is simply to regulate and make sure this never crosses a boundary infringing on the rights of a certain group of individuals.
The person who responded to my blog called me arrogant and if the person defines arrogant as: “making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearing assuming; insolently proud” I would most adamantly agree. I am arrogant not in what I would consider overbearing but in being proud, even insolent in a sense. I am proud of being a champion of individual rights. If he defines it as: “Having or displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth and self-importance.” I again would be proud to be called arrogant for I agree that I display my sense of self worth and self-importance, I again am proud to believe in what I do. I did not come to these conclusions overnight. I also did not accept blindly what everything I was taught by my parents, or pastors or teachers. I believe in what I have been able to come up with through my own independent research and a love for live, a love for every individual. I am an arrogantly egotistical atheist objectivist who believes in reason, logic and rationality as to be the most important of human elements. Not that I like to classify myself! I believe in the individuality of every single person I meet, and I disagree with anybody who would ask for more government intervention in our lives.
I will end with a quote from Thomas Jefferson: “Government Big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take away everything you have. The course of history shows that as government grows liberty decreases.”
Monday, March 31, 2008
Man's Rights
Man’s Rights
Definition from dictionary.com: a Right is not something someone gives to you but something no one can take away.
“Rights” are a moral concept- the concept that provides a logical transition from the principles guiding an individual’s actions to the principles guiding his relationship with others – the concept that preserves and protects individual morality in a social context – the link between the moral code of a man and the legal code of a society. Between ethics and politics, individual rights are the means of subordinating society to moral law. (Rand 108)
A right is the property of an individual that society as such has no rights, and that the only moral purpose of a government is the protection of individual rights. A “right’ is a moral principle defining and sanctioning a man’s freedom of action in a social context. There is only one fundamental right (all the other are its consequences or corollaries): A man’s right to his own life. Life is a process of self-sustaining and self generated action – which means: the freedom to take all the actions required by the nature of a rational being for the support, the furtherance, the fulfillment and the enjoyment of his own life (such is the meaning of the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness) (Rand 110)
The source of man’s rights is not divine law or congressional law but the law of identity. A is A and man is man. Rights are conditions of existence required by man’s nature for his proper survival. If man is to live on earth, it is right for him to use his mind, it is right to act on his own free judgment it is right to work for his values and to keep the product of his work. If life on earth is his purpose he has a right to live as a rational being: nature forbids him the irrational. (Rand, Atlas Shrugged)
For the first time in history man’s rights were not given to him by a dictator or by god as a privilege but were understood to be inalienable to be part of man’s nature and the best part of him. That government was not there to dictate a man’s life but was instilled by the people for the people. The Declaration of Independence laid down the principles that “To secure these rights, governments are instituted among men” this provided the only valid justification of a government and defined it’s only proper purpose: to protect man’s rights by protecting him from physical force.
There has been a breaking and a misunderstanding of what rights truly are and how they operate in a social context. An alleged right which takes away the rights of another man cannot by its very definition be called a right. Right’s do not enforce obligations on another person or on a group of persons. No man can have a right to impose an unchosen obligation, an unrewarded duty or involuntary servitude on another man. There can be no such thing as “the right to enslave”
One of the biggest key indicators of our society losing sight of the concept of rights and their corollaries was the Democratic Party platform of 1960 which summarizes the switch from the concept of rights from political to the economic realm. It declares that a democratic administration “will reaffirm the economic bill of rights which Franklin Roosevelt wrote in our national conscience sixteen years ago”
1. The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms of mines of the nation.
2. The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation.
3. The right of every farmer to raise and sell his product at a return which will give him and his family a decent living.
4. The right of every businessman, large and small to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home and abroad.
5. The right of every family to a decent home
6. The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health.
7. The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accidents and unemployment.
8. The right to a good education
Jobs, food, clothing, recreation, homes, medical care, education etc do not grow in nature. These are Man-Made values, goods and services produced by men. Who is to provide them? A question to add at the end of all 8 points above is a simple one, at whose cost? The question number one becomes the right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries of shops or farms of mines of the nation, at whose cost. Number two becomes the right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation, at whose cost? If some men are entitled by right to the products of the work of others, it means that those other are deprived of rights and condemned to slave labor.
Our fore fathers spoke of the Pursuit of Happiness; they did not speak of the right to happiness, only a guarantee to the pursuit of happiness. This means that a man can take the actions he thinks are necessary to achieve his own happiness. It does not mean that other must make him happy. For example the right to life means that a man has the right to support his life by his own work and to as high a level that he may reach. It does not mean others have to provide him with the necessities of life. The right to property means that a man has the right to take the economic actions necessary to earn property, to use it and to dispose of it; it does not mean that others must provide him with property. The right to free speech means that a man has the right to express his ideas without danger of suppression, interference of punitive action by the government; it does not mean that others must provide him with a lecture hall, a radio station or a printing press through which to express his ideas.
In order to become a free society man must have an understanding of his rights and that no one may take his rights unless he allows them to take his rights from him. Over the last 80 years or so there has been a systematic destruction of man’s rights and only very few willing to do anything about it, this is because the main flaw in the founding of this country was a lack of a moral code to back up the constitution. Abraham Lincoln once said that “Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves” Does this simply mean outright slavery, or does it imply in its context a slavery of any kind? Slavery of forcing a man to hire employees he normally would not, or of forcing some group of people to pay for the hardship of others?
One of the major problems with society today is the concept of their rights, that it is their right to medical care and a job simply showcases the ignorance’s of society and its Individuals in our modern culture. A group of individuals who claim they have these rights and it is the responsibility of the government to provide them with these rights.
“Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows that as a government grows liberty decreases.” - Thomas Jefferson.
In this end I leave a simple way to understand rights. Imagine this scenario, a man lives on a deserted island, in order to finally understand man’s rights he must ask himself these questions.
1. Do I have a right to food?
2. Do I have a right to housing?
3. Do I have a right to water?
4. Do I have a right to medical care if I get injured?
5. Do I have a right to a job?
The man on the island has none of those ‘rights’ along with many more that today we have begun to imagine as ‘rights.’ The only right this man has is the right to use his mind in order to build a net to catch fish, to make a fire to cook the fish. He must use his mind to cut down trees in order to build him a shelter and to make him bandages when he injures himself, he does not have a magical right to medical care on a deserted island. Rights are a moral transition from his individual rights to the rights in his dealings with other men.
I Swear by my life and my love of it that I shall never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine – John Galt (Rand, Atlas Shrugged).
Definition from dictionary.com: a Right is not something someone gives to you but something no one can take away.
“Rights” are a moral concept- the concept that provides a logical transition from the principles guiding an individual’s actions to the principles guiding his relationship with others – the concept that preserves and protects individual morality in a social context – the link between the moral code of a man and the legal code of a society. Between ethics and politics, individual rights are the means of subordinating society to moral law. (Rand 108)
A right is the property of an individual that society as such has no rights, and that the only moral purpose of a government is the protection of individual rights. A “right’ is a moral principle defining and sanctioning a man’s freedom of action in a social context. There is only one fundamental right (all the other are its consequences or corollaries): A man’s right to his own life. Life is a process of self-sustaining and self generated action – which means: the freedom to take all the actions required by the nature of a rational being for the support, the furtherance, the fulfillment and the enjoyment of his own life (such is the meaning of the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness) (Rand 110)
The source of man’s rights is not divine law or congressional law but the law of identity. A is A and man is man. Rights are conditions of existence required by man’s nature for his proper survival. If man is to live on earth, it is right for him to use his mind, it is right to act on his own free judgment it is right to work for his values and to keep the product of his work. If life on earth is his purpose he has a right to live as a rational being: nature forbids him the irrational. (Rand, Atlas Shrugged)
For the first time in history man’s rights were not given to him by a dictator or by god as a privilege but were understood to be inalienable to be part of man’s nature and the best part of him. That government was not there to dictate a man’s life but was instilled by the people for the people. The Declaration of Independence laid down the principles that “To secure these rights, governments are instituted among men” this provided the only valid justification of a government and defined it’s only proper purpose: to protect man’s rights by protecting him from physical force.
There has been a breaking and a misunderstanding of what rights truly are and how they operate in a social context. An alleged right which takes away the rights of another man cannot by its very definition be called a right. Right’s do not enforce obligations on another person or on a group of persons. No man can have a right to impose an unchosen obligation, an unrewarded duty or involuntary servitude on another man. There can be no such thing as “the right to enslave”
One of the biggest key indicators of our society losing sight of the concept of rights and their corollaries was the Democratic Party platform of 1960 which summarizes the switch from the concept of rights from political to the economic realm. It declares that a democratic administration “will reaffirm the economic bill of rights which Franklin Roosevelt wrote in our national conscience sixteen years ago”
1. The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms of mines of the nation.
2. The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation.
3. The right of every farmer to raise and sell his product at a return which will give him and his family a decent living.
4. The right of every businessman, large and small to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home and abroad.
5. The right of every family to a decent home
6. The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health.
7. The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accidents and unemployment.
8. The right to a good education
Jobs, food, clothing, recreation, homes, medical care, education etc do not grow in nature. These are Man-Made values, goods and services produced by men. Who is to provide them? A question to add at the end of all 8 points above is a simple one, at whose cost? The question number one becomes the right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries of shops or farms of mines of the nation, at whose cost. Number two becomes the right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation, at whose cost? If some men are entitled by right to the products of the work of others, it means that those other are deprived of rights and condemned to slave labor.
Our fore fathers spoke of the Pursuit of Happiness; they did not speak of the right to happiness, only a guarantee to the pursuit of happiness. This means that a man can take the actions he thinks are necessary to achieve his own happiness. It does not mean that other must make him happy. For example the right to life means that a man has the right to support his life by his own work and to as high a level that he may reach. It does not mean others have to provide him with the necessities of life. The right to property means that a man has the right to take the economic actions necessary to earn property, to use it and to dispose of it; it does not mean that others must provide him with property. The right to free speech means that a man has the right to express his ideas without danger of suppression, interference of punitive action by the government; it does not mean that others must provide him with a lecture hall, a radio station or a printing press through which to express his ideas.
In order to become a free society man must have an understanding of his rights and that no one may take his rights unless he allows them to take his rights from him. Over the last 80 years or so there has been a systematic destruction of man’s rights and only very few willing to do anything about it, this is because the main flaw in the founding of this country was a lack of a moral code to back up the constitution. Abraham Lincoln once said that “Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves” Does this simply mean outright slavery, or does it imply in its context a slavery of any kind? Slavery of forcing a man to hire employees he normally would not, or of forcing some group of people to pay for the hardship of others?
One of the major problems with society today is the concept of their rights, that it is their right to medical care and a job simply showcases the ignorance’s of society and its Individuals in our modern culture. A group of individuals who claim they have these rights and it is the responsibility of the government to provide them with these rights.
“Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows that as a government grows liberty decreases.” - Thomas Jefferson.
In this end I leave a simple way to understand rights. Imagine this scenario, a man lives on a deserted island, in order to finally understand man’s rights he must ask himself these questions.
1. Do I have a right to food?
2. Do I have a right to housing?
3. Do I have a right to water?
4. Do I have a right to medical care if I get injured?
5. Do I have a right to a job?
The man on the island has none of those ‘rights’ along with many more that today we have begun to imagine as ‘rights.’ The only right this man has is the right to use his mind in order to build a net to catch fish, to make a fire to cook the fish. He must use his mind to cut down trees in order to build him a shelter and to make him bandages when he injures himself, he does not have a magical right to medical care on a deserted island. Rights are a moral transition from his individual rights to the rights in his dealings with other men.
I Swear by my life and my love of it that I shall never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine – John Galt (Rand, Atlas Shrugged).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)