In response to this post:
How come the Left always preaches ‘sustainability’ or ‘it’s for the children’…until it comes to their economic plans?
How come, indeed?
19 thoughts on “A Great Comment”
Comments are closed.
In response to this post:
How come the Left always preaches ‘sustainability’ or ‘it’s for the children’…until it comes to their economic plans?
How come, indeed?
Comments are closed.
It’s because the number one thing libs do is make people beholden to government. They do this by giving stuff to citizens they need votes from. If they need to take the money from other citizens, so much the better because they must redistribute wealth to those less fortunate. To maintain ‘sustainability’ or to meet the ‘it’s for the children’ attitude, one must first be personally responsible to always keep the goal in mind.
Well, to speak of “sustainability” with respect to economics means that one would have to respect economic concepts and partially buy into the implications of economic models like the Law of Supply and Demand or the No “Free Lunch” theorem.
I get the impression that when they talk about “sustainability”, they’re far more interested in sustaining their hold on power than anything else.
Paul Krugman has finally ponied up the quasi-intellectual economic coverage they need to justify massive government spending, in and of itself, as a requirement for economic health. It would be like Arnold endorsing the donut diet. Watch out.
Their economic plans are sustainable – now that the stimulus bill has upped govt spending it will be treated as a new baseline and any attempt to roll it back will be treated as a spending cut. Therefore: The spending will be sustained ….
The call for “sustainability” is, in fact, a call for the bulk of humanity to live in abject poverty. The Left’s economic policies have the result — and likely the goal — of leaving the bulk of humanity living in abject poverty.
So, clearly, Leftist economic policies are always compatible with “sustainability”.
Rob is right, although rather than “in abject poverty” I’d use “at subsistence level”. Same thing, but has the gold stamp of “sustainability”.
The call for “sustainability” is, in fact, a call for the bulk of humanity to live in abject poverty.
Of course–the fact that socialism breeds poverty is not a bug, its a feature. If there was no poverty the demand for socialist politician’s “product” would fade away. Its in their best interests to breed poverty, and they seem to be damn good at it.
Because leftism is the most dishonest ideology ever devised. It is a religion, and a bad one at that.
Also, leftists usually don’t have children of their own. They abort them. They are against children.
Here is a list of the ten most damaging myths in America. Most of them are concocted by the left.
This funny picture shows how leftism, much like smoking or drug addiction, damages a person from within.
I’ve been asking precisely this question for a long time. I go down to the farmer’s market in my Santa Monica neighborhood and see all of the expensive, organicly grown food (which is good but no better tasting than the food sold at the normal grocery store) and wonder at their claims that organic methods = sustainability. My uncles are wheat farmers in Oklahoma. I can assure you that we are nowhere near the point of unsustainability in our traditional agriculture. We could feed billions more and, if liberal idiots could pull their heads out of their posteriors, genetically modified crops will reduce the need for fossil fuel based fertilizer etc., and we could sustain even more agriculture.
Liberals constantly mis-apply the concept of sustainability to areas where it has no application and completely fail to comprehend that it applies to every economic and social program that they advocate.
The Democratic party is a very ‘third world’ party, in that as their power grows, America becomes more like a third-world banana republic. Democrats ensure that :
1) The elites have absolute power, and don’t even have to pay taxes, while the same elites demand higher taxes on others.
2) Crime rises, cities decay, and minorities become ghetto-ized.
3) Businesses flee, making living standards drop.
So Democrats = third world despots.
Conservatives are the only force that can nurture meritocracy, racial harmony, and a middle class. Conservative principles safeguard these things. Without conservatives, America would become Zimbabwe or Nigeria.
Sure Rob. Such abject leftist policies as forbidding child labor, eight hour day, clearly led to increased human misery and poverty.
Indeed. Adults (which are commonly called “children” even though they are too old for that to apply) should be able to start working at 14 in my view. Children should be able to start working long before that. And the eight hour day only counts for certain folk (namely those paid by the hour). We can’t know how much misery and poverty has been caused by these policies. Opportunity costs are often very hard to spot. But I’d say that the usual figures of 25% or so of children in poverty is a good hint that these policies cause problems.
@Godzilla “Such abject leftist policies as forbidding child labor, eight hour day, clearly led to increased human misery and poverty.”
Since when did the modern left own those policies? Your comment is of a part with the historical amnesia about the role of religion in the history of abolition.
The term ‘sustainable’ is simply a Malthusian code word for “we can eliminate as many people as we feel we need to in order to justify our self righteousness to ourselves and keep living the way we want to without having to endure any sacrifices ourselves”
“The term ’sustainable’ is simply a Malthusian code word for “we can eliminate as many people as we feel we need to in order to justify our self righteousness ”
Indeed. This is a scary slippery slope.
How long before a wacko shoots up a school in order to ‘reduce the footprint of humans on the earth, before those humans reach reproductive age’, and we see lefty nuts defending the mas-murdering school shooter?
We all know that this lunacy can happen. We are at a point where leftists will justify culling other people’s children for ‘environmental’ purposes.
Scary.
“Since when did the modern left own those policies? Your comment is of a part with the historical amnesia about the role of religion in the history of abolition.”
Indeed. The left is very good at duping the right with its historical revisionism. Examples.
1) Hitler was NOT right wing, he was left wing. Even larger genocides (by Stalin and Mao) were also left-wing.
2) America did NOT lose in VietNam. America withdrew in 1973, while the SOuth Vietnamese held out for 2 more years, falling in 1975. So the SV lost 2 years after America left.
3) The KKK was heavily tied to the Democratic Party, and still is, since Robert Byrd, a senior KKK leader, is still a Democrat Senator to this day. Also, George Wallace ran as a Democrat candidate for President as recently as 1976. How Republicans are branded as racist is a mystery.
Three myths that the left has successfully re-written history about.
How come the Left always preaches ’sustainability’ or ‘it’s for the children’…until it comes to their economic plans?
Because the Left has never been for those things. Just as the “peace” movement isn’t about peace, and the various Leftist “minority” movements are not about individual rights (as the gays in California found out last November), the environmentalist movement isn’t about clean air or “sustainability”.
The Left is about reversing the Enlightenment and all of its fruits — including science and political freedom.
Period.
Sure Rob. Such abject leftist policies as forbidding child labor, eight hour day, clearly led to increased human misery and poverty.
Those came about as a result of economic progress; the government actions, as often happens, were redundant — but done in order to take the credit.
And they were *liberal* policies, note, not Leftist ones. Don’t be confusing the two.
How Republicans are branded as racist is a mystery.
It is not a mystery. The Left has had near-monopoly control of the intellectual domain since the 19th century, and as such controls the terms of thought for the culture at large. The substitution of “democracy” for “freedom” towards the end of the 19th century was one of their first big corruptions; it signals the beginning of the Left’s takeover, inversion and eventual destruction of American liberalism.