Opinions, please!

[johnaries]

A normally very Intelligent Libertarian friend of mine at work recently circulated an email to a select few of us in response to an article he saw on the Web. I feel compelled to respond, and have started a letter that I am quite proud of, so far - although it's longer than I wold have liked. Could I get some general response?

Well, I started doing a “point-by-point” reply, but I realized that would be rather tedious to read. So, with your indulgence, I’d like to summarize what I perceive as the main points:

• Can one man “change” Civilization? Yes. Archimedes changed civilization with the pulley, the lever, and the principle of mass displacement. Henry Ford changed civilization with the concept of the assembly line and mass production. More recently, Bill Gates (love him or hate him) changed civilization by making computers accessible to the masses. Politically, Hammurabi changed civilization, Alexander changed civilization, Napoleon changed civilization, and Adolf Hitler changed the course of history and civilization. Bush “insiders” have already remarked that he intends to be a “Legacy President,” which means that he hopes to make a lasting difference and, in effect, change civilization as we know it. Which brings us to the next point;
• How can anyone compare Bush to Hitler? Adolf Hitler and the concept of Fascism have become icons of evil. However, Hitler used Christianity to gain popularity and power. From http://www.rationalrevolution.net/understanding_fascism.htm :
o Early on fascism was seen as a movement that embraced Christianity. In Germany fascists promoted what they called “true Christianity”, which was essentially Christian fundamentalism.
o “May God Almighty give our work His blessing, strengthen our purpose, and endow us with wisdom and the trust of our people, for we are fighting not for ourselves but for Germany.” - Adolph Hitler, 1933 Berlin Speech
o "The Government, being resolved to undertake the political and moral purification of our public life, is creating and securing the conditions necessary for a really profound revival of religious life. - Adolph Hitler, 1933 Reichstag speech
o “And then came the German resurrection. It began with a change of faith. While all the German parties before us believed in forces and ideals which lay outside of the German Reich and outside of our people, we National Socialists have resolutely championed belief in our own people, starting from that watchword of eternal validity: God helps only those who are prepared and determined to help themselves. In the place of all those international factors - Democracy, the Conscience of Peoples, the Conscience of the World, the League of Nations , and the like - we have set a single factor - our own people.” – Adolph Hitler, 1938 Weimer Speech
o Is it me, or does this sound really familiar?
o Actually, as many parallels I can draw to early Nazi Germany, there are a lot more parallels to George Orwell’s fictional novel 1984 - Personally, I suggest you read a little of history, and add a little of Orwell and Ann Rand.
• What about our system of Checks and Balances? This could never happen today in the USA! “The price of Freedom is eternal vigilance” – Thomas Jefferson. “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" - George Santayana. The Germans never thought that they could be so deceived. They never thought it could “happen to them.” They were conquered by their own complacency. In defense of the German state of mind, they were bombarded by a strong media propaganda that has never had an equal – well, until now.
Our system is not perfect, and the Founders Fathers knew it. It was a patchwork of compromise. That’s why they allowed for Amendments. That’s why they made every allowance to ensure that the Rights of an Individual are protected from the “will” of the Majority. But, they were also counting on future generations to remain “vigilant” and not fall into the trap of complacency.
• What about National Security? I hate to bring up Hitler again, but he was able to convince the German people to justify giving up many of their Civil Rights for National Security reasons because “they were at war.” “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Ben Franklin
• Enough Alarmist crap, what about education and NCLB? – I am a proponent of educational “accountability” but NCLB has many fatal flaws:
o It was based on a “results-oriented” program in Texas in which the “results” were based on lies and manipulation: http://www.factcheck.org/article181.html
o It relies solely on Standardized Tests. Standardized Tests only portray part f the picture. Some people are just good at taking tests, and it doesn’t necessarily portray an adequate picture of their education. I know, I always scored in the 99th percentile on standardized tests, which is SUPPOSED to mean that I was “smarter” than 99 percent of the other students in the country. I wasn’t, and I knew it. I was just good at “guessing” the right answers. Sure, that takes a certain amount of intelligence and skill, but NOT the skills they were testing for! Standardized Tests are useful, but only in conjunction with other evaluation criteria.
o Vouchers – Bottom line: Sounds good, but they’ve been tried and they don’t work. First of all, the vouchers don’t cover all of the private school tuition; by THOUSANDS of dollars per semester. If a family is so poor that they can hardly afford clothes to send their child to Public School, how is sending them a voucher to cover half the amount of a Private School going to help them if they can’t afford the rest of the tuition? In school districts where vouchers have been tried, the majority of the beneficiaries were families who were already sending their children to private schools (i.e., THE WEALTHY!). For the rest, as far as “results” were concerned (according to the GAO report http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d01914.pdf ): “The contract researcher teams for Cleveland and Milwaukee found little or no statistically significant differences in voucher students’ achievement test scores compared to public school students” And: “Milwaukee’s contract research team concluded that there was no consistent evidence that Milwaukee’s voucher program had positively or negatively affected student achievement.”

o Funding – Under NCLB, if a school system is performing poorly, you DECREASE it’s funding? This would make sense in the private sector where the only goal is to MAKE money, but not in the Public sector where one of the biggest problems is LACK of funding to attract qualified people! I know there is a lot of waste in our current bureaucratic system, but there are much better solutions! This is a classic example of “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.”

• But why should I be FORCED to pay such high taxes? Why can’t it be more like the 1800’s? What happened to people just “giving” to charities as they saw fit? - “Heavy Sigh”, first of all, things weren’t so great in the 1800’s. I know some people like to romanticize the period, but you really wouldn’t want to live back then. The world is a much different place. 1800 policies wouldn’t work now. But let’s talk about taxes:
o “Death tax” a.k.a “Inheritance tax” a.k.a “Estate tax” – OK, I don’t personally know anyone who would be paying this tax, but I’m starting with it as an example. All of these names are misnomers. It was originally intended as a “Dynasty tax.” Basically, what happened was that we had some people who capitalized on the American Dream, worked hard, and became rich. Of course, they wanted to pass their wealth on to their children. The problem was that they were working so hard on achieving the American Dream they never had the time to teach their children their work ethic. But, the children could invest their inherited wealth to make more money and pass the increased wealth to their children. As the wealth passed from child to grandchild to great-grandchild, they became increasingly wealthy, but decreasing skillful. Therefore, they relied more and more on the “influence” that their inherited wealth gave them rather than any personal ability or skill. Unfortunately, most of the “influence” they wielded was in the political arena. Can you imagine Paris Hilton dictating domestic policy? Well, in essence, that’s what was happening. The Estate Tax was implemented in reaction to that problem. Yes, it needs to be updated - No, it doesn’t need to be repealed. Let me repeat: Can you imagine Paris Hilton dictating domestic policy? (and her little dog, too!)
o Privatizing Social Security - Let’s be honest. If you’re planning for Social Security to support you after you retire, you better be ready to eat lot’s of Hamburger Helper made with Ken-L Ration… and you may not want to count on the Hamburger Helper part of it! There are lots of private investment plans available for retirement. Social Security is intended as a “safety net” in case your private plans go South. Ask all the folks who intended to retire on their Enron investments how great an idea THAT was!

[MsConduct]

1. I'll give you a kick so it won't fall off the page....

it is probably very interesting, but too heavy for this time of night, K?

[johnaries]

2. thanks!

Yeah, I'm afraid it will scare off anybody just because of the length, if nothing else. Baby steps, huh?

[MsConduct]

3. My pleasure!

[hfojvt]

4. I disagree with the "one man" thing

They all had lots of help, and probably others would have done the same thing. Eli Whitney was using mass production in 1812.
I do not give Bush that much credit. He is more like a sock puppet on an evil arm. He could not do what he does without Delay and Dr. Evil and Scalia, etc.
"little of Orwell and Ann Rand."
Maybe a typo, but her name is Ayn Rand. I would never recommend her books.
As far as the "forced to pay high taxes" goes, it depends on the income level. Bush is determined to cut taxes on income that is not earned (interest and dividends) and to target the wealthy for tax breaks. Take Bush's 2003 tax cut (please!). It was supposedly $350 billion. Much of that went to the richest 10%. If their share of the tax cut was reduced, our share could be increased. For a person who does not believe in "targeted" tax cuts, Bush sure does target the wealthy.

[johnaries]

5. Thank you!

Ann WAS a typo, thanks for catching it. I never liked her writing style much either, but she was fairly prophetic and pretty popular. I think Orwell sums it up pretty well, so I may just go with his reference.

You are right about the men behind the curtain, but the ONE MAN thing was in response to his incredulous comments about a recent article that Bush "may change Civilization". Adding that Bush is just the puppet may help prove my point, however.

Good comments! Thanks!

[hfojvt]

6. It is her ideas that I hate

not so much her writing style. Ayn was a libertarian writing about the evils of socialism. Orwell was a socialist writing about the evils of fascism (except in Animal Farm where he lampoons socialist excesses). Ayn's John Galt goes on strike against un-earned rewards, but who gets more of those than a CEO? Yet they probably love Ayn and think they are Atlases ready to shrug if one of those pinko-liberals gets elected.