Liberalism has given itself many different names over the years. The
American Left and its political vehicle, the Democrat Party, are most
accurately described as collectivists. The belief that unites the
various factions within the party is their dete…

You miss a big component, which just completely destroys your argument. Liberals don’t believe that concentration of power in the state is morally or intellectually superior to individual rights. They do, however, think it’s the only way to equalize everybody’s rights. Without a strong government, the weakest levels of society suffer, and the strongest (usually the richest and the most powerful) are resistant to giving up their prominence. I guess we (liberals) believe that most people are not quite strong enough, in their hearts or their behavior, to willingly part with their money or their power long enough to benefit the poor, the sick, or the elderly. That’s very different from saying we don’t believe in individual rights. An analogous example is free speech. Many liberals (though not all) believe that all speech is protected (including porn) unless it is harmful. For example, you can say whatever you want about me, but if you yell “FIRE” in a crowded theatre and I’m trampled to death, you’re going to jail. That’s an example of looking out for everybody versus protecting individual rights. You don’t have the RIGHT to put me at risk for death or injury by saying whatever you want in a crowded theatre. Likewise, we think individuals who have benefited from the richness of society and have acquired wealth and power should pay more to support that society than those who have not been so lucky. And you can define “lucky” as inheriting wealth or brain power or perseverence or strength or good health, or whatever. It’s still the luck of the draw, and it’s still the product of a rich and free society. It wouldn’t matter how smart or strong you are, or how hard you worked, for example, if you were born in an African town where your ethnicity was held against you and you could be killed for your name. So to continue the analogy, I don’t believe rich people have the individual right to opt out of paying taxes or even of paying a heavier burden for taxes.

Beth in St. Louis

Absolutely – Spot – 0n, as usual.

Your insight reminds me of the essayist Bill Whittle (or vice-versa).

Either way, it’s a huge compliment.

Thank you for your contributions.

Why?

I appreciate the point the good Dr. appears to be tacitly making, that there is a parallel argument used by pro-choice advocates, wherein the life of the mother is weighed against the life of the fetus. But the point is not directly applicable in this case. A major issue for pro-choice advocates is the determination of the point at which the fetus gains the moral and hence legal stature of an individual. There is no such issue regarding Mary Jo and Teddy. Hence, the Dr’s original argument is diminished by distraction. The point is not strong enough, within the context of the main article, to have been included, and upon deeper reflection serves only to muddy the outstanding momentum that the original article has without it. IMHO, of course.

“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened.”

For one thing, it would do an awful lot of damage to the pro-choice movement.

The one false note in an otherwise splendid excoriation.

Myno on September 1, 2009 at 6:08 AM

Why?

Thanks for nothing, mealy-mouthed, stand-for-nothing, wind-sock mimicking, so-called Independents.

*I pray that our wonderful experiment can withstand The Jug-eared One and his minions and all of the real and manufactured crises past the year 2012.

Please tell your representatives in the House and Senate how you feel. This is a pivotal moment in our collective lives, and our children and their children will be affected by our actions or lack thereof.

This is no time to be complacent.

“The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.”

In that case why do they whine about a little waterboarding? Surely the safety of Americans outweighs the comfort of KSM.

The Left is rapidly approaching the point at which humans offer virginal sacrifices to appease the gods.

I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.

/Mary Jo Kopechne (maybe, if she’d lived long enough to be able to write something like that on paper. Would she willingly give her life for Ted Kennedy’s later ‘successes’? If she were visited by one of Marley’s ghosts, and asked to choose, before her untimely death, given the future’s history, would she have chosen to asphyxiate in a bubble of air in the bottom of a foul, dark lake? For Ted? Ted Kennedy reveled in living his life in spite of the death of Mary Jo Kopechne; a death that would’ve ended the career of most any other politician, especially one with an ‘R’ after the name. The Kennedy name; I hope it lives on only in infamy.

Oh, and that’s Ayn Rand’s quote, really.)

Mary Jo never had a chance to live her life, marry, bear children, experience love and happiness and also disappointment and difficult choices. I weep for her memory and I am utterly baffled that a country as fine as America continues to celebrate monsters and their insipid hive mentalities over the pure perfection of individual life.

For one thing, it would do an awful lot of damage to the pro-choice movement.

The one false note in an otherwise splendid excoriation.

Checkmate. It’s becoming more and more and more and more questionable as to whether it’s still way early to be kicking and screaming about a shift toward communist rule, or fear to do so because the line of INTENT is beginning far too blurry.

edited verbiage

Excellent.

Excellent read as always.

Other than that, I couldn’t agree more. We now know that causing one woman’s death is worth 40 years of liberal policies. Statist calculus has been stripped bare.

Well said.

You have a rare gift. Your essays are brilliant and cuts to the bone in exposing the empty foundations of the Left. I read the piece by Oates and as a former boxer, I have read many of her books on such as she is a great fan of the sport. Her piece shocked me and you nailed her tone (breezy). The aloofness of the Left’s rationale is so commonplace nowadays that it begs to be exposed for what it is. I hope you write a book!

Where ever you are, you are rapidly IMO becoming a major opinion maker whose conservative intellect will become too great to keep under the wraps of this Green Room.

milemarker2020 on August 31, 2009 at 10:10 PM

+1

Doctor Zero is among the upper echelon of conservative voices, IMO.

A noble society owed Mary Jo Kopechne a measure of undying anger over her death, and should have denied any position of high honor to the man who never repented for his part in it. A truly wise society should work forward, from the inherent rights of the individual, to fair and just laws that respect those rights. Collectivism works backward, from a desired outcome to the elaborate political theories necessary to justify it… and like any other massive vehicle being driven in reverse, it sometimes runs people down.

Word.