Shepherds and Sheep

[Wiseacre]

Thomas Sowell has an interesting piece out today called "Shepherds and Sheep". In it he discusses the idea that people make so many damaging mistakes that the gov't should take over many of our decisions for us. Which assumes there is a group of smarter and more superior people who are more suitable decision makers than most of us are.

Dr. Sowell goes on to describe the many decisions that gov't has made over the past century, including WWI, disarmament and appeasing Hitler, and the subsequent WWII and the Holocaust. There were many among the intelligentsia who actually supported the idea of totalitarianism, and the likes of Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini. That was then of course, but the point is whether it is wise to cede over too many decisions to those who think they know better than we do what is best not only for us but future generations. I look at politicians today, so many of their actions are based not in what's best for us but what's best for them, their party, and their backers. Short term fixes are the rule, just enough to look like they're doing something to win in the next election. Rather than working together to arrive at the best possible answers, politicians are busily demagoguing the other side. And these are the people we should trust to make the important decisions for us? I don't think so.

snippet:

" Too many among today's intellectual elite see themselves as our shepherds and us as their sheep. Tragically, too many of us are apparently willing to be sheep, in exchange for being taken care of, being relieved of the burdens of adult responsibility and being supplied with "free" stuff paid for by others. "

Shepherds and Sheep | RealClearPolitics


So - at some point there has to be a paradigm shift, back to individual rights and associated responsibilities, and away from collectivism. I suspect it will take a major social upheaval due to a major war or another great depression as bad as or worse than the 1930s. Sadly, we don't do well at preventing catastrophes; unfortunately it will be our kids and grandkids who will pay the price.

 

[AmyNation]

I see this thinking on both sides of the fence. The idea that average Americans are too uninformed and that more decisions should be taken out of their hands. It's definitely one of the more scary steams of thought recently.

 

[UKRider]

I see this thinking on both sides of the fence. The idea that average Americans are too uninformed and that more decisions should be taken out of their hands. It's definitely one of the more scary steams of thought recently.

"So that Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

"For the People"

That's why they are voted into office.

 

[depotoo]

I see this thinking on both sides of the fence. The idea that average Americans are too uninformed and that more decisions should be taken out of their hands. It's definitely one of the more scary steams of thought recently.

"So that Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

"For the People"

That's why they are voted into office.[/QUOTE
see, the problem is there used to be some integrity in politics. Today not so much as alot of what you here is lies or stretching of the truth. Hard to make an informed vote unless you research rather than believe all you are fed. And unfortunately that paradigm has not become well known yet and thus voters think they are hearing truth when they are not and vote based on that.

 

[Freemason9]

I see this thinking on both sides of the fence. The idea that average Americans are too uninformed and that more decisions should be taken out of their hands. It's definitely one of the more scary steams of thought recently.

I believe most Americans ARE woefully uninformed and rely upon political leadership to step up to the plate. That's the American system--one person, one vote. Let's face it; many Americans are simple-minded "one issue" voters (don't take my guns, there's too many foreigners here, etc.). They have no idea whatever about the nuances of income tax deductions for charitable contributions or how corporate law can undermine individual rights. It's complicated.

However, I also believe the most Americans are fine with it. Politicians tend to be at least somewhat sociopathic, and they are often extremely narcisistic. They are predators in one form or another, and most people aren't. They want to lead their lives, and they have no great desire to control the lives of others. Unfortunately, they are also at risk in this system--they are unprepared for the sociopaths.

Democracy is messy.

 

[Wiseacre]

I think some are bought off, they'll vote for the guy that promises the most free stuff. Puts me in mind of the Detroit Councilwoman who is expecting a federal bailout as quid pro quo for voting for Obama. Others voted for or against a candidate for discriminatory reasons: race, gender, religion, whatever. Some are misinformed or uninformed, or they vote for the 'cool' person. Others vote one way or the other cuz that's how they've always voted. Kinda ridiculous really, not nearly enough people actually are paying attention, or realize what the long term ramifications are for what a given candidate wants to do or not do. Our schools are doing very well at teaching kids how to think critically, and they're going to pay a heavy price for that lack at some point in the future. We are largely a nation of sheep as Dr Sowell says.

 

[Old Rocks]

I see this thinking on both sides of the fence. The idea that average Americans are too uninformed and that more decisions should be taken out of their hands. It's definitely one of the more scary steams of thought recently.

"So that Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

"For the People"

That's why they are voted into office.[/QUOTE
see, the problem is there used to be some integrity in politics. Today not so much as alot of what you here is lies or stretching of the truth. Hard to make an informed vote unless you research rather than believe all you are fed. And unfortunately that paradigm has not become well known yet and thus voters think they are hearing truth when they are not and vote based on that.

In my lifetime I have seen Joe McCarthy and Spiro Agnew. Want to tell me again about how there used to be some integrity in politics?

 

[jasonnfree]

Thomas Sowell has an interesting piece out today called "Shepherds and Sheep". In it he discusses the idea that people make so many damaging mistakes that the gov't should take over many of our decisions for us. Which assumes there is a group of smarter and more superior people who are more suitable decision makers than most of us are.

Dr. Sowell goes on to describe the many decisions that gov't has made over the past century, including WWI, disarmament and appeasing Hitler, and the subsequent WWII and the Holocaust. There were many among the intelligentsia who actually supported the idea of totalitarianism, and the likes of Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini. That was then of course, but the point is whether it is wise to cede over too many decisions to those who think they know better than we do what is best not only for us but future generations. I look at politicians today, so many of their actions are based not in what's best for us but what's best for them, their party, and their backers. Short term fixes are the rule, just enough to look like they're doing something to win in the next election. Rather than working together to arrive at the best possible answers, politicians are busily demagoguing the other side. And these are the people we should trust to make the important decisions for us? I don't think so.

snippet:

" Too many among today's intellectual elite see themselves as our shepherds and us as their sheep. Tragically, too many of us are apparently willing to be sheep, in exchange for being taken care of, being relieved of the burdens of adult responsibility and being supplied with "free" stuff paid for by others. "

Shepherds and Sheep | RealClearPolitics


So - at some point there has to be a paradigm shift, back to individual rights and associated responsibilities, and away from collectivism. I suspect it will take a major social upheaval due to a major war or another great depression as bad as or worse than the 1930s. Sadly, we don't do well at preventing catastrophes; unfortunately it will be our kids and grandkids who will pay the price.

I always look at who sponsors people like Sowell. Ultra right wing Hoover Institute funded by the likes of the Walton heirs. People interested in keeping working people down, no bargaining rights, and wages low. I just know Sowell considers anyone receiving help from the government as someone who gets "free stuff" But does he ever scold the Mitt Romneys that are able to offshore themselves (for tax purposes only), or the businessman that can take a tax deduction on his boat as a 2nd home. Or again, the mittster writing off his wifes race horse.
The right wingers at Hoover and similiar institutes use the Sowells and the Walter Williamses to go after their own kind. It won't bring the racism accusations that would come about if a white person wrote like them. They're basically IMO uncle toms. Do they ever mention that the planned elimination of our manufacturing industry has added to the very high unemployment rate of blacks in the big cities? Manufacturing in the cities of the north was the reason for the black exodus from the south in the first place and then they had that lifeline to jobs pulled out from under them. No, they're interested in the blame game, it's the liberals that made the blacks into lazy freeloaders.

 

[Wiseacre]

Good to see you're keeping an open mind about it. Didn't really address the point of the thread though. So you think the Hoover Institute is ultra right wing, or that Sowell is a Tom for having a different point of view from your own. 'K.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Oh. When I saw the title of the thread, I thought it was about radio/TV political talk show hosts and their fans.

Silly me.

.

 

[zeke]

wiseacre, have you ever asked yourself how it is that poor people got so much "given" to them?
I mean, they only represent, at most, 15% of the voters. They have no lobbyists. They have no huge campaign contributions to make.

So how did they get all that "free" stuff? And why do you blame them for taking advantage of what our wonderful politicians have given them? Do you blame the middle class like me for taking advantage of what the government gives me in the way of tax writes offs?

Just curious why you rethugs pick the weakest, poorest and one of the smallest voting blocks to
pound on day after day after day.

Poor people did not write the tax legislation that they take advantage of. Did you know that? Sure you did.

Must just be easier to pick on someone that is already down and can't fight back.

 

[editec]

The correct purpose of government is to organize the people for issues that are greater than any individual can handle.

Few governments seem to have the ability to know the difference between what MUST be done, and what they want to do, that is true.

However the alterative of government is anarchy.

Given the choice between a slightly bad government and anarchy, I'm going with slightly bad government.

Government, much like cops, is a necessary evil.

 

[clevergirl]

wiseacre, have you ever asked yourself how it is that poor people got so much "given" to them?
I mean, they only represent, at most, 15% of the voters. They have no lobbyists. They have no huge campaign contributions to make.

So how did they get all that "free" stuff? And why do you blame them for taking advantage of what our wonderful politicians have given them? Do you blame the middle class like me for taking advantage of what the government gives me in the way of tax writes offs?

Just curious why you rethugs pick the weakest, poorest and one of the smallest voting blocks to
pound on day after day after day.

Poor people did not write the tax legislation that they take advantage of. Did you know that? Sure you did.

Must just be easier to pick on someone that is already down and can't fight back.

Our politicians, who continue to tax job creators to gorge themselves and sprinkle freebies to their electorate, are causing jobs to dry up and or leave our country.

The "free stuff" is the result of politician's campaigning on entitlement spending. Their winning is the result of voters liking the idea of voting themselves "free stuff". It's the way class presidents won elections in High School. It used to be, in our country, that after HS we became a little less self interested and a bit more interested in the "good of the country". Entitlement spending on "free stuff" is not good for the country... productive citizens are.

Your reasoning is known as a logical fallacy. No one is accusing poor people of writing legislation, so setting up a false argument is ridiculous.

Now, if you want to ask why some blame voters for electing irresponsible politicians; who either are too stupid to understand their ideology is destroying our country, or too irresponsible to care...then you'd at least be asking a legitimate question.


BTW...your stats are a bit off

1 in 2, have fallen into poverty or are scraping by on earnings that classify them as low income.

 

[Wiseacre]

wiseacre, have you ever asked yourself how it is that poor people got so much "given" to them?

Have you ever asked yourself is it better to give people stuff or give them a way to earn their own stuff? Is it better to create a stronger economy with more jobs and opportunities? I know why the democrats enact programs to give out free stuff; it's called buying votes.

I mean, they only represent, at most, 15% of the voters. They have no lobbyists. They have no huge campaign contributions to make.

15%? Could I see some evidence of that? During the last election, many say the democrats won partly due to a superior ground game. IOW, people knocking on doors and phoning people. Who do you think does most of that work? Funny, I always hear the pols on both sides talking about the middle class, but not so much about the poor, including your hero.

So how did they get all that "free" stuff? And why do you blame them for taking advantage of what our wonderful politicians have given them? Do you blame the middle class like me for taking advantage of what the government gives me in the way of tax writes offs?

Our wonderful politicians are only interested in keeping people in thrall to the democratic party. Go find the quotation by LBJ when he signed the 1964 Civil Rights Bill. I blame people like you for supporting those wonderful politicians who are running up huge debts that will be passed onto our kids and grandkids. That sir, is unconscionable.

Just curious why you rethugs pick the weakest, poorest and one of the smallest voting blocks to pound on day after day after day.

Rethugs? Nice. Pound on day after day? What the hell are you talking about?

Poor people did not write the tax legislation that they take advantage of. Did you know that? Sure you did.

Must just be easier to pick on someone that is already down and can't fight back.

Bullshit. They can fight back, they just don't want to. Why should they bother, they're getting subsidized by the gov't for damn near everything. Why bother looking for a job, why bother doing anything to become more successful. You don't seem to realize it, but people like you are their worst enemy. Why? Because people like you have made it easier for them to go through life doing nothing, contributing nothing, earning nothing.