Truth_and_Power
07-29-2008, 06:26 PM
I find certain "right" positions confounding to logic. How is it that many on the right can whine about "elites" all the time, and yet oppose policies that favor the middle class over the super-rich? I would think that a person opposed to favoring "elites" would prefer a reasonably adjusted estate tax, AMT, and overall progressive tax structure.
They despise "the fairness doctrine", but they whine about "liberal media bias". They blame any organized movements on the left on George Soros, yet they have favored relaxing laws against media consolidation.
How can you despise elites and still prefer George Bush over Obama? Bush is from a rich conneticut family with old money, and he attended an ivy league school mostly on the wings of his family connections. Obama was raised by a mother and a stepfather and ascended to his current status by his own merit.
I guess what they are really doing is superimposing the image of "elites" onto the argument about collectivism versus individual freedom. But to suppose that the elites are on the side of collectivism is to my mind a fallacy. Given ultimate freedom and a lack of connections between regular individuals, the elites WILL be the ones who profit most. It is only by banding together and demanding a system that distributes rewards across the spectrum that those of us with less will get our due. Feudalism is the default state of a totally "free" people, a situation that puts nearly all property in the hands of the "elite". Only democratic movements can forge a mass of regular individuals powerful enough to combat these immense concentrations of power.
They despise "the fairness doctrine", but they whine about "liberal media bias". They blame any organized movements on the left on George Soros, yet they have favored relaxing laws against media consolidation.
How can you despise elites and still prefer George Bush over Obama? Bush is from a rich conneticut family with old money, and he attended an ivy league school mostly on the wings of his family connections. Obama was raised by a mother and a stepfather and ascended to his current status by his own merit.
I guess what they are really doing is superimposing the image of "elites" onto the argument about collectivism versus individual freedom. But to suppose that the elites are on the side of collectivism is to my mind a fallacy. Given ultimate freedom and a lack of connections between regular individuals, the elites WILL be the ones who profit most. It is only by banding together and demanding a system that distributes rewards across the spectrum that those of us with less will get our due. Feudalism is the default state of a totally "free" people, a situation that puts nearly all property in the hands of the "elite". Only democratic movements can forge a mass of regular individuals powerful enough to combat these immense concentrations of power.