Skip to comments.Why Liberalism Doesn't Work
Posted on 12/11/2012 7:19:06 AM PST by Kaslin
Reason No. 1 not to tremble at the prospect of liberal ascendancy, world without end: Liberalism doesn't work. At any rate, not the way liberals commonly suppose it's going to work when they devise enormous taxpayer-funded, government-run programs, minimally connected, if at all, to the realities of human existence.
An article in the Dec. 9 New York Times, of all places, gleams in the darkness of the present political moment as the Obama administration works to rub away resistance to its vision of an all-encompassing federal government. "This is painful for a liberal to admit," admits Nicholas D. Kristof, a Times columnist who, oddly, doesn't see his job as requiring regular trashing of conservatives, "but conservatives have a point when they suggest that America's safety net can sometimes entangle people in a soul-crushing dependency. Our poverty programs do rescue many people, but other times they backfire." Do tell. Kristof's careful examination of anti-poverty programs in Appalachia presents a viewpoint far more nuanced than, say, a Barack Obama speech urging the overhaul of capitalism. He finds that giving people too much free money for too long can create disincentives to live non-dependent lives. He talks about parents who pull illiterate kids out of literacy programs to avoid forfeiting a $698 monthly Supplement Security Income check meant to "help" the intellectually disabled.
Kristof (unlike various think tank and media figures) notes the complexity of the poverty issue. Part of that complexity, he reports with amazing realism (notwithstanding a well-earned personal reputation for realism), consists in the seductions of money.
Kristof understands marriage as "one of the best forces to blunt poverty. In married households, only one child in 10 grows up in poverty, while almost half do in single-mother households. He sees intellectual disability as a category unrealistically enlarged: presently covering "a full 8 percent of all low-income children," at an annual taxpayer cost of $9 billion. "Those kids," he says, "may never recover: a 2009 study found that nearly two-thirds of these children make the transition at age 18 into S.S.I. for the adult disabled. They may never hold a job in their entire lives and are condemned to a life of poverty on the dole -- and that's the outcome of a program intended to fight poverty."
Better, he continues, to work at creating environments favorable to helping welfare clients stand on their own feet. He praises the efforts of the aid group Save the Children, whose Appalachia staff visits "at-risk moms," helping "nurture the skills they need in the world's toughest job: parenting."
He notes a growing body of research suggesting that "the most effective strategy is to work early on children and education, and to try to encourage and sustain marriage." As in -- Kristof didn't say this; I'm saying it -- ye olden tyme, before the welfare lobby conspired with Congress to make welfare the solution of solutions to every human plight.
Kristof's insight, it is fair to note, has major antecedents. Charles Murray, in "Losing Ground," was first to make in sustained fashion the point that welfare, by fostering dependency, undermines social stability. Last January, Murray followed up, in "Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1920-2010," with chilling confirmation that a "great divide" exists between new classes, upper and lower.
"Changes in social policy during the 1960s," he writes, "made it economically more feasible to have a child without having a husband if you were a woman or to get along without a job if you were a man..."
The old social norms have broken down. Who's to reconstruct them now? Conservatives? By themselves? What about conservatives, joined by liberals such as Kristof -- eyes on both sides of the philosophical spectrum bulging with horrified recognition of harm inflicted in the name of salvation.
Conservatives can do business with liberals who, so to speak, get it -- unlike the hierarchs of the new/old administration in Washington, where denial of plain facts seems to many the plainest proof of virtue. For now.
In Short — Liberalism is neither logical nor rational. That about covers it.
The damage done by those doing the pounding is always appalling. Individuals, families, communities, and nations have all been totally destroyed by the pounders before the inevitable collapse of their house of cards.
Those who try to force the inhuman and unworkable upon Mankind have what the Bible refers to as a depraved mind - a mind that does not work in the normal and natural way. We see this most clearly in the current widespread hatred of God. Not just rejection. Outright hatred.
IMHO, those who present a clear and present danger to our very civilization are criminals and should be apprehended, tried and executed for treason. Certainly, the bar should be set very high for such a conviction, but the Bill Ayers's of the world desire my death and the death of everything I hold dear.
If the collapse of Liberalism and the attendant destruction of our civilization is on the horizon, I won't be surprised when I see some of the architects of that collapse hanging from trees on the Capitol Mall.
Either than or sending jobs to China.
And out of America.
(one of those)
It’s THE LAW OF EFFECT. Generally, you will receive more of the behavior you reward and less of the behavior you punish. This is why liberalism/socialism/communism never works. If you reward people for not working, you will have more people who don’t work. If you punish people for working hard, you will have fewer people working hard. The dirty little secret is that the Democrat leaders know this. They just don’t care. They’re Grifters out to enrich themselves and they could care less about their effects on our country.
“The first priority of any serious program against poverty is to strengthen the male role in poor families.” George Gilder
Feminists will fight this one tooth and nail
Liberals have never wanted anything to work. They only want to channel more money through their own hands, which money somehow gets “lost” in the system. This is the basis of communism, socialism, Marxism or any other big government scheme, and why such failed ideas have continued, despite every evidence they don’t work.
Liberalism is nothing more than a symptom of the disease.
The disease is Totalitarianism. It is human nature to dominate. Humans are barbaric. It took the US Constitution to stop the barbarism. That’s why the left wants it destroyed.
The only way to stop the onset of totalitarianism in the United States is not by getting rid of the leaders of the left, but getting rid of their minions in the media. “If you control the message, you control the people.”
Change that and we are halfway there.
As Max Tucker proves it, they fight the idea of man dominance with tooth and nail, but liberals are so hateful, if spun as a triumph, the will think of it as evil genius and bow to it slavishly. Any other reasoned argument they will reject. They need it as a force of itself.
Liberals think that with gambling with votes or money they are not gambling with the loaded chamber of a murderous tyrant as in RUssian roulette.
The Chinese were correct when they called us Paper Tigers, and that is because if things are presented as anti-war and gambling with money and hope, it looks better. However when anti-war is faced with russian roulette, it looks crazy.
And, yet, in this nuclear age where Soviet greed has been replalced with Oligarchic greed and financial chaos in the world, we are loading our heads with real bullets.
Washington is in denial about playing with our moneys with blacks who have been stabbing our backs with feminists while we were fair with them. They do not want to see it that way. Gambling is gambling, and gambling with national security and this man vs. that man instead of thinking right is loading for Russian roulette.
Socialism is utter failure. And communists, by “socialisting” the worker has effectively killed the worker of its skill value in exchange for a social value. In effect, what wins is the nuclear worker, the weapon holder. But Marx was no such hard scientist. God does not play dice, or Russian roulette, that is, and liberals want to avoid any and all arguments, it is in this that they find solace in look good slogans instead of bothering with true arguments.
Indeed, liberal slogans have the same force effect as racism, which in turn has the effect of promoting a tribalist type leadership which will favor his or her own tribe and genocide of others, just like in Africa.
Racism and liberal sloganism breeds dictatorship and murder. Some power out there has hidden from us the way blacks and feminists have talked trash behind our back while smiling at us during the day. Go in a street and give them the look of “yeah, I know how you voted with hate and talking trash about me behind my back”, and watch their faces of guilt. These people are wussies, unexpressable empty anger at anything in their path and hypocrites.
It doesn’t work because it is devoid of the wisdom of God.
A great disaster had befallen Russia: Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.
The meaning of earthly existence lies not, as we have grown used to thinking, in prospering but in the development of the soul.
...Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
You’re right about the Law of Effect. But “the Grifters” aren’t working to enrich themselves. Their goal is to redefine the economic landscape. The more takers they encourage — and the more producers they DIScourage — the greater the strain on the system, until it finally collapses. Then the State steps in and encouragement or discouragement don’t matter anymore. Citizens are slaves who will do as they’re told or they will be eliminated as enemies of progress.
For the time being, we have a choice of being a maker or a taker. After the Fall, we’ll all make whatever we’re told to make and we’ll all take whatever we’re allowed to take.
This is the whole hidden stupid issue about “illegal imigration”. The truth is it is “illegal EMIGRATION” of US assets and welfare to foreign lands and into liberal oblivion pseudo charities for themselves.
They attack CEOs for avoiding taxes abroad and getting mail order brides so as to personaly avoid taxes by taking foreign citizenship. They try to tax that. But what the FRACK is the problem with getting at illegals from Mexico? It is the same problem, but it is spun as illegals.
Liberals talk their heads into their own arses because they feel like the MExican, they want the assets to be illegaly desiminated left and right. This is in essence the Obama policy of domestic redistribution and betrayal in foreign aid to muslim.
Stephanopoohpooh and Julia Roberts’ consent with a “just a tax” with Obama care which is illegal in its exemptions since congress is not exempt from the law of the land, is just such massive examples of liberal cowardice and let go’s.
There was a cover story in either Newsweek, or Time, in 1980. It showed an African-American family, five generations of it, all on welfare, with no end in sight. It’s the last time I ever saw a liberal publication admit that liberalim’s string had run out. Reagan won in a landslide.
But facts and logic do not matter to libtards, because they are emotionalists and are motivated by their feelings. Their feelings of guilt and pity outweigh reality and reason.
We are living under lies and corruption, chaos and confusion. The only government able to govern man is the Kingdom of God and His Messiah. And it’s coming. That’s why the father of lies is busy. His time is short and he knows it. Fear not.
Whats wrong with this guy? Of course liberalism works - to obtain liberal outcomes. You do everything you possibly can to achieve a dependent population, then rule.
In the meantime you have built up a hatred for a group of people - Jews, whites, rich people - from whom you confiscate wealth and kill them...and no one cares.
Nobody wants to be King of Crapland. They yammer about socialism, but that’s just to get the socialists on board. The leaders of the Democrat party know that socialism is bad for them too. They saw Kruschev wearing poor fitting clothes and riding around in a beater. They don’t want that. They think they are clever enough to walk that line between “Enough Socialism To Get Elected” and “Whoops! We Went Too Far And Ruined Everything!”. Show me one Democrat LEADER, not mouthy little ideologue, who hates the high life. Pelosi? Reid? Paleface Lizzy Warren? Hillary? Obama? They throw out the old socialism stuff to misdirect us. Every time a Republican is on tv, he/she should ask the reporter about how the Democrat leaders live. Are they living in one room, unheated apartments riding bicycles? Because if they aren’t, then they’re just a bunch of lying Grifters.
“Moms and dads fear that if kids learn to read, they are less likely to qualify for a monthly check for having an intellectual disability.” - Kristoff
In completely unrelated news, only 7% of Detroit 8th graders test as proficient in reading.
Stalin’s Chosen didn’t live bad lives. The Inner Circle always profits; they’re above the fray. The cataclysm hits only at the plebian strata; it’s the job of the Chosen to determine the fate of the serving classes.
After all, if you have a managed economy, you have to have those who manage and those who are managed. The Grifters are working to assure they are the former and that you and your unwashed peasant friends are the latter.
Sounds like the mice's proposal to bell the cat.
Any ideas on how to do that?
“Any ideas on how to do that?”
Yup. Use Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” against the left. That’s all you need.