Mankind has always known a struggle between opposing world views. Think of the choice offered to Adam and Eve: stay in a sheltered partnership of law and order or venture into the unknown armed with your god-like wits. Many long years later, conservative vs liberal conflict can give balance to existence or cause bitter discord and separation.
Conservatives are usually 'older and wiser', while liberals tend to be idealistic youths who leap before they look. Of course, this is a simplification that is not always valid. However, it is true that many liberals of the sixties are swelling the ranks of conservatives in the twenty-first century. The reasons for this shift are many.
For instance, a person who got their first credit card in college and ran up significant debt during their twenties might have learned to control their money. Having learned that 'buy now pay later' can have serious consequences, they might take a dim view of politicians who vote for popular but costly programs that tip the public budget into the red.
Liberals, however, might view present needs as more important than future stability. They want to feed the poor, heal the sick, earn a lot of money with their college education so they can pay high taxes, protect the environment while creating technology to provide new employment opportunities, and still feed off the fat of the land. After all, an ideal society can provide well for all when assets are shared, right?
This kind of thing causes much political unrest in a country. The socialist view that government should take care of the helpless can go too far, some say. If the amount of welfare for a family is more than the breadwinner can earn by working, some see a problem. They also believe that social services offer help too readily. If a person applies for unemployment, the social worker may offer food stamps as well. This angers some taxpayers.
History shows that it is hard for political leaders to balance freedom and compassion, even when these values are paramount. (The records are full of leaders who talked of the common good but who, in reality, sought their own advancement.) People who feel that the government should mandate education of children might truly believe that this is the best way. However, if public policy constrains those who have a different opinion from teaching their own children at home, it smacks of tyranny.
There are other areas besides economics where world views collide. The role of religion in education and public life, public school curriculum and standards, the definition of marriage, energy production, jobs, climate change, and health care are only a few of the reasons for furious debate.
Conservative vs liberal is probably never going to stop, as viewpoints tend to be very diverse. Although the constant back and forth may get tiring, the alternative - one viewpoint that silences all others - is scary. Think freedom vs tyranny and keep up the attempt to see both sides and seek satisfactory compromises.
Conservatives are usually 'older and wiser', while liberals tend to be idealistic youths who leap before they look. Of course, this is a simplification that is not always valid. However, it is true that many liberals of the sixties are swelling the ranks of conservatives in the twenty-first century. The reasons for this shift are many.
For instance, a person who got their first credit card in college and ran up significant debt during their twenties might have learned to control their money. Having learned that 'buy now pay later' can have serious consequences, they might take a dim view of politicians who vote for popular but costly programs that tip the public budget into the red.
Liberals, however, might view present needs as more important than future stability. They want to feed the poor, heal the sick, earn a lot of money with their college education so they can pay high taxes, protect the environment while creating technology to provide new employment opportunities, and still feed off the fat of the land. After all, an ideal society can provide well for all when assets are shared, right?
This kind of thing causes much political unrest in a country. The socialist view that government should take care of the helpless can go too far, some say. If the amount of welfare for a family is more than the breadwinner can earn by working, some see a problem. They also believe that social services offer help too readily. If a person applies for unemployment, the social worker may offer food stamps as well. This angers some taxpayers.
History shows that it is hard for political leaders to balance freedom and compassion, even when these values are paramount. (The records are full of leaders who talked of the common good but who, in reality, sought their own advancement.) People who feel that the government should mandate education of children might truly believe that this is the best way. However, if public policy constrains those who have a different opinion from teaching their own children at home, it smacks of tyranny.
There are other areas besides economics where world views collide. The role of religion in education and public life, public school curriculum and standards, the definition of marriage, energy production, jobs, climate change, and health care are only a few of the reasons for furious debate.
Conservative vs liberal is probably never going to stop, as viewpoints tend to be very diverse. Although the constant back and forth may get tiring, the alternative - one viewpoint that silences all others - is scary. Think freedom vs tyranny and keep up the attempt to see both sides and seek satisfactory compromises.
No comments:
Post a Comment