Republicans and Democrats: Love/Hate
Posted by rbroberg 7 years, 10 months ago to Philosophy
I am convinced that Democrats believe in the needs of people. The Democrats see an issue and wish to see an immediate difference. The immediate difference is just the change desired and the change desired is based on an exact measurement of the distance between reality and utopia. The utopia is a collection of vague notions that define multiple consistencies within the amalgamation that constitutes their party. The change desired is also based on blame and punishment of the consistencies possessing the desired state or on a negation of characteristics defining that desired state. Because the critical feature of Democrats political survival is to be or be concerned with a difference between the states of different groups, the Democratic Party will not be able to function without defining differences from which issues arise. I will not belabor the reasons this approach cannot lead to the egalitarian utopia the Democrats desire. I will simply point out that it requires an antithetical point of view for its own survival.
The Republicans believe in the needs of the nation. From their perspective, the big picture is American interests, whatever those are deemed to consist of. One minute, it is free trade. The next, it is protectionism. One minute, it is individual rights. The next, it is advocating for enforcing closed borders. I do not need to spend time describing the conditions for the Republican Plutocrats who reverse the causal link between individual rights and wealth.
The two parties have essential connections that influence and propagate a cyclical pattern of political control. The Democrats define themselves as the have-nots, pushing against the Republicans for a greater share of the pie. The Republicans, pleased at their success, attribute their share of the pie to "tradition". The Democrats negate the various attributes of this tradition. Then the Republicans react, moving in linear fashion toward the Democrats or further from them in a negation of the negation. The Democrats are emboldened with each fracture of traditional values as this garners additional control. This has all the characteristics of an highly dysfunctional relationship. The Democrats love to hate the Republicans, the Republicans hate to love the Democrats... whatever it is, it abuses the kids. The taxpayers.
Objectivism and Objectivism alone describes the conditions and standards we should follow if we wish to succeed and prosper. Objectivists know that individual rights and capitalism are not the need, but the requirement of human life. No other system will do it.
The Republicans believe in the needs of the nation. From their perspective, the big picture is American interests, whatever those are deemed to consist of. One minute, it is free trade. The next, it is protectionism. One minute, it is individual rights. The next, it is advocating for enforcing closed borders. I do not need to spend time describing the conditions for the Republican Plutocrats who reverse the causal link between individual rights and wealth.
The two parties have essential connections that influence and propagate a cyclical pattern of political control. The Democrats define themselves as the have-nots, pushing against the Republicans for a greater share of the pie. The Republicans, pleased at their success, attribute their share of the pie to "tradition". The Democrats negate the various attributes of this tradition. Then the Republicans react, moving in linear fashion toward the Democrats or further from them in a negation of the negation. The Democrats are emboldened with each fracture of traditional values as this garners additional control. This has all the characteristics of an highly dysfunctional relationship. The Democrats love to hate the Republicans, the Republicans hate to love the Democrats... whatever it is, it abuses the kids. The taxpayers.
Objectivism and Objectivism alone describes the conditions and standards we should follow if we wish to succeed and prosper. Objectivists know that individual rights and capitalism are not the need, but the requirement of human life. No other system will do it.
As to needs of the Nation, those are also RESPONSIBILITIES.
Exactly!
The politicians might think the taxpayers are the kids, but the taxpayers are actually the parents who go to work and make a living.
I'm also interested in the part syaing "Democrats define themselves as the have-nots". I have certainly heard that, but the actual numbers show people's association with the parties is not correlated with wealth.
I am also interested in the part about distance from utopia. Do you think both parties have an utopian vision of sorts? If so, which party feels closer to utopia?
Regarding the second question: I'm pretty sure the utopias look totally different. My perception is that the DP defines equality and particularly solidarity to be their goal while the RP defines a national exceptionalism and/or dominance to be theirs. That is just my opinion.
To the third question, I believe both parties are wrong on fundamentals so I do not recognize either as contributing significantly to a Utopian society. Finally, I can only define utopia (from a political perspective) as that state in which a government respects, protects, and enshrines individual rights.
It my ideal too. It has elements from both party in that the US in that it's based on an idea of liberty rather than on an ethnic group.