Constructive gadfly
Published on November 20, 2005 By stevendedalus In Politics

It is often said or implied on JU that liberals are elitists who contemplate their navels while dismissing the realities of the living world. The inference here is that liberals indeed are individualists who take solipsistic pride in do-nothing as opposed to the brilliant drive of the entrepreneurs to address the pragmatic needs of the nation. Strangely, liberals discount the great deeds of the ilk of Ford, Walton, Carnegie and Gates whose true individualism led to progress in the realm, while men like Jefferson, Lincoln, W. Wilson, L. Johnson, Truman and FDR are praised for being the nation’s conscience and therefore held back the otherwise seamless move forward toward total progress.

The majority of this site also infers that liberals, self appointed noblesse oblige, are above the sweaty thought of inventiveness and subsequent labor, consequently incapable of appreciating the great contributions of laissez faire.

On the other hand, this right leaning majority, too, are elitist in that they worship the political bias toward the business world without regard to the need of reigning in excesses. Though claiming to be realists, they were positively euphoric over the Reagan Revolution to reduce the wave of government to harmless laps in the bathtub so that corporations could develop a Tsunami of supply side economics through corporate welfare and defense contracts leading to lower wages for the masses and a super military complex that contrary to common belief bankrupt us, not the Soviets who were already bankrupt in ideology. The bleeding heart minimum wage is but a another form of welfare for the shiftless who find no internal drive to better themselves. If reconstruction after Katrina is to be driven, wage rates must be put aside — though Bush has since backed down . The volunteer armed services are more inclined to favor war since so many enlistments are of the uneducated and minorities who with little prodding revel in waving the flag and more apt to stay the course. [Yet a funny thing happened on the way to Tar-Heel country — dominated by military bases — 57% of which have become leftist “elitists” by disapproving of Bush’s handling of the war and 56% of the military there disapprove of Bush’s leadership; and worse, only 19% of the soldiers there felt Iraq was worth fighting for. Despite the argument that polls can be misleading, there appears to be a prevailing trend even among the military.] Pardon the digression.

Everyone is against illegal immigration but for exploiting laborers and having to pay social security for the domestics in the homes and castles of the affluent. SUVs are essential for Soccer Moms even though the percentage of use is minuscule and a Minivan would serve the special and family purpose just as well. Luxury tax is taboo and shot through with arguments that Africans in the minds would lose jobs when basketball players and the ladies of Hollywood and Newport would stop buying jewelry; yacht building would be at a standstill; massive layoffs there would be at Luxury car plants; the Waltons and Gates would no longer give millions to “charity.” God forbid — the eleventh commandment — that the affluent be taxed more on capital gains, else results of trickle down investments would collapse. Public education is at the crossroads of failure and termination; never mind that it is continually shortchanged — besides, teachers should stop complaining about low salaries, after all, they can’t very well enter the real world of true competition, since there are those who teach and those who do.

It is my contention that conservatives are as overwhelmed by their own elitist mythology as liberals are of theirs.

 

Copyright © 2005 Richard R. Kennedy All rights reserved. Revised: November 20, 2005.

http://stevendedalus.joeuser.com


Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Nov 21, 2005
Good job StevenDeDalus. I appreciate what you bring to the forums.

Still, I am surprised that you even bother making the articles that you do, knowing what sort of audience you're writing to.

There is a reason that I only write about "issues" on extremely rare occasions.

I haven't added a link to another JU Blog in over a year. Maybe I'll add yours.
on Nov 21, 2005
Oh, my, thanks, Jamie!
on Nov 22, 2005

Partcularly when they're too lazy to address the entire article--cherry picking again.

Just that comment.  You are welcome to cherry pick mine.  I can agree with an article, but disagree with some parts of it.  I have stated that before on several of yours.

on Nov 22, 2005
The conservatives have only to let you speak.


Partcularly when they're too lazy to address the entire article--cherry picking again.


So I can then take it on face value that "you've" never heard of disagreeing with a particular "individual statement"?
on Nov 22, 2005
I have stated that before on several of yours.
Oh, yes, we both agree to agree coupled with but...  But I was addressing they not you.
on Nov 22, 2005
So I can then take it on face value that "you've" never heard of disagreeing with a particular "individual statement"?
No, my reference was to the good Dr's statement that conservatives will thrive on the singled out misrepresented statement that servicemen are "stupid"--uneducated does not mean that but surely vulnerable to the art of persuasion.
on Nov 28, 2005
There is a reason that I only write about "issues" on extremely rare occasions.


I think your voice is needed.
2 Pages1 2