Posted by
Rajjpuut's Folly on Thursday, July 16, 2009 11:21:58 PM
On the freedom-responsibility coin: liberals emphasize that the government has the responsibility to care for the people but not interfere with the individual (not seeing that governmental "care" means governmental spending means taxes and ultimately complete interference). As far as balancing freedom with responsibility, the Liberal doctrine comes from that old Cole Porter song: “Anything Goes!" when it comes to personal morality or lack thereof.
The Plutocratic-Oligarchy
of Rajjpuut
One of these wonderful days, the United States will become a Plutocratic-Oligarchy of Rajjpuut. Which means that a then RICH Rajjpuut will be considered the essential part of the elite few controlling things here-abouts. Or would the reader perhaps prefer his own plutocratic-oligarchy instead? Rajjpuut raises these possibilities after repeatedly hearing something like, "What's the Constitution got to do with it?" from Cretins of the liberal persuasion. Further inquiries shows that when an ultra-liberal is speaking their point of view at various times tends to wander all over the political map during the conversation will wonder between many of the following governmental philosophies but NOT aristocracy, fundamentalism, libertarianism, minarchism, or theocracy, no never. On the freedom-responsibility coin: liberals emphasize that the government has the responsibility to care for the people but not interfere with the individual (not seeing that governmental care means governmental spendingmeans taxes and complete interference). As far as balancing freedom with responsibility, the Liberal doctrine comes from that old Cole Porter song: “Anything Goes!”
Forms of Government Description
Anarchy --- total freedom without any responsibility: chaos
Aristocracy --- "Nobles" as a group control lower classes
Communism --- the government controls the country's economy
Democracy --- the majority in popular voting processes dominate minority
Democratic/Republicanism --- Like the American government where ruling officials are popularly elected; but a "Bill of
rights" and electoral college protect the rights of individuals and individual states
Despotism --- Powerful individual and his supporters rule the land and "crush" any opposition
Dictatorship --- Much like despotism, but "benign dictators" have been seen from time to time
Fascism --- an authoritarian leader controls all aspects of life right down to family life and schools
Federalism --- Belief in the benefits coming from strong central government rule
Fundamentalism --- a very stringent form of Theocracy
Kleptocracy --- "thieves rule" means goverment officials extort as the price of doing their jobs
Libertarianism --- a democratic/republicanism which is inclined toward strong national defense; low taxes; and an
emphasis on individual freedom
Minarchism --- Commitment to "a government that governs least: a minimal libertarian government
Modern Bull Moosism ---- Conservative fiscal and progressive form of Democratic/Republicanism
Monarchy --- one person within favored lineages rules a nation
Oligarchy --- a few, supposedly elite, persons dominate government
Plutocracy --- the rich control the government
Republicanism--- elected representatives make government decisions
Socialism --- government dominates much of the economy and is somewhat responsible for cradle to casket care of the
individual
Theocracy --- One approved single religion controls every aspect of life
On the other hand, when talking with extreme-right-wing conservatives Ol’ Rajjpuut gets the feeling they actually believe they OWN the constitution. Some of them, many of them, espouse ideas that are very much Theocratic or even quite Fundamentalist: “This is a Christian country.” These people tend to get upset when separation of church and state is brought up; they tend to get upset when children don’t learn Christmas carols in school or creationism in school science class. When asked whether they’d get upset if their children had to learn Buddhist chants or the Hindu Creation myths in science class . . . these folks tend to hide from the issues and insist that some mysterious “they” can do that in “their” countries, but not here in ours: not noting that the majority of people in this country don't go to church every Sunday, nor feel they should be compelled to do so. In short it is the extreme-right-wing conservatives’ belief that the Pilgrims and others like them escaped religious intolerance in their original countries just so they could come here to these shores and become the new dominant intolerant religion. The song that gets their allegiance is “Gimme that Old Time Religion.”
As you know, Rajjpuut is, in point of fact a Libertarian and almost a Minarchist. Call him 95% fiscal conservative and 90% social liberal. In other words: tax almost nothing except enough to defend the nation and see to necessary infrastructure and NEVER interfere in people’s lives, religions, personal decisions, bedrooms, etc. Rajjpuut believes if this reasonable and conscionable stance was to become the Republican Party’s “raison de etre” they’d win nine of ten national elections and at least 70% of the statewide ones as well. Why? Because it’s simple common sense,this is what everyone wants for himself/herself . . . though often eagerly denying to others.
Liberals want big government to own the right to invade everyone’s wallets. Conservatives want the a different sort of big government to freeze out the separation of church and state tenets of the constitution and have the right back into everyone’s bedroom and privacy. Americans lost an awful lot over our history by allowing government intrusion into both those spheres of influence since 1787.
America's governmental patterns Range of years
A. Monarchism 1606-1776
Revolution 1776-1783
B. Semi-anarchy 1783-1787
C. Minarchism 1787-1799
D. Libertarianism 1799-1829
E. Democratic-Republicanism 1829-1861
F. Federalistic Democratic-Republicanism 1861 to 1933
G. Federalistic Socialism Since FDR
H. Semi-communistic Federalism??? Under Obama???
Both of the present major parties are unwilling to stand by the individual as both a taxpayer and as a son or daughter of the “Bill of Rights” by respecting separation of church and state. The party that finally decides by necessity that it will stand by the individual in both those arenas will dominate American politics for the next 100 years. It’ll be as if a new “Bull Moose Party” Teddy Roosevelt is running against only pure Democratic opposition: under those conditions would anyone be surprised if the Republicans won a consistent 56-60% of the electoral votes in every national election?
On the “litmus test issues” Rajjpuut fails both the Republican and Democratic viewpoints: He does not believe government spending is a very good idea, very often: so will not get liberal support ever. He does not own a vagina and therefore will not interfere with those who have them when it comes to abortion; (if she did own a vagina, Rajjpuutina, would NEVER get an abortion nor judge herself so sinless as to cast any stones at anyone who decided in opposition to Rajjpuutina’s personal code) nor will Rajjpuut ask children of other religions than Christianity be forced to learn creationism in public schools. These two litmus tests issues are the issues where the Independent voters feel disenfranchised by the two major parties and is it any wonder the Independent, who controls the results of virtually every election, comes to despise them both.
On the one hand, the law of the land for the last thirty-six years is constantly challenged by the conservatives as well as the Constitutional Imperative of Separation of Church and State. On the other hand, the liberal's hand is in every pocket but his own. It's not a beautiful reality . . . .
Live long, strong and ornery,
Rajjpuut