3 simplistic conservative beliefs that are radically slowing American progress

[applegrove]

3 simplistic conservative beliefs that are radically slowing American progress

by John Enrenreich, AlterNet, Salon

http://www.salon.com/2016/05/15/3_simplistic_conservative_beliefs_that_are_radically_slowing_american_progress_partner/

"SNIP...........



Three sets of simplistic conservative belief stand out, accepted by virtually all Republicans and, unfortunately, by many Democrats. First: “We can’t.” The most pressing problem in the United States and the key to most of its problems, say conservatives, is our unbalanced budget and the resultant overwhelmingly large national debt. Raising taxes to deal with it is unthinkable. Higher taxes would burden ordinary taxpayers and businesses, the “job creators,” and would threaten our international competitiveness. The bottom line is that we simply can’t afford to expand government programs (for example, the social safety net).

Second: “The problems are too complex.” The belief that complex social problems can be solved through acts of government is widely considered to be foolish. Many years ago, when I was in college, Henry Kissinger, then a professor, would occasionally have lunch with the members of our campus anti–nuclear weapons group. Scoffing at what he saw as the naïveté of our proposals to advance world peace through a nuclear test ban treaty, he would proclaim in his deep German accent, “These things are more complicated than they seem.” (We callow youths, out of his presence, would mock him, proclaiming in fake German accents, “These things seem more complicated than they are.”)

Third: “We don’t want to.” To conservatives, freedom is inherently a characteristic of individuals and “big government” is the enemy of freedom and prosperity. Societal constraints on individual freedom put us on the slippery slope to tyranny. It is not government but the “free market” that solves social problems, and the only legitimate goals of public policy are to promote “growth” and serve the needs of businesses (the “job creators,” the “drivers of the economic engine”).

Let us examine each of these contentions. First, “we can’t” and the problem of the debt: Budgetary constraints seem to make it impossible even to consider introducing new and expensive government programs. Many liberal economists have argued that the supposed threat to our economy posed by the national debt has been greatly exaggerated. In any case, the budget surpluses of the later Clinton years were turned into massive deficit neither by something inherent in our system of government nor by the alleged tendency of liberals to throw money at social problems. The causes of the deficit were simple. Government income was deliberately reduced by the Bush-era tax cuts favoring the wealthy and then reduced further, involuntarily, by the recessions of 2001 and 2008. Meanwhile government spending increased, largely due to the soaring costs of the Bush war of aggression in Iraq. Nothing inevitable. All reversible.


.............SNIP"

[immoderate]

1. The reasons that conservatives give for rejecting Bernie's policy proposals...

[font size=+1]right?[/font]

--imm

[applegrove]

2. Yes. If the US had a parliament like Canada, meaning he would win the congress if he won the

election, I would be for him.

[immoderate]

3. Of the form: "Yes, if ... [non-sequiter] ... I would be for him."

Hint: We don't have to be in Canada for you to be for him! Is this a fourth reason?

--imm

[Fresh_Start]

4. The author is a clinical psychologist.

Not exactly sure how that gives him either political or economic creds.

[applegrove]

5. Really. You don't find him right on? Who would know more about progress a vulnerable but strong

entity makes but a psychologist. Who would know more about delusions and mental blocks. Do you not the the GOP is using psychologists to come up with their memes?

[Fresh_Start]

6. I don't believe that his expertise is in this arena.

I believe his observations are true of some individuals...
but society is not an individual.
Its a mass of different individuals each with their own understanding and perspective and opinion.


I honestly believe that the failure is that we are fundamentally selfish.
We don't value other Americans: we don't value any of 'the other'.
Instead we need someone to look down upon so that we feel superior.
Anyone who caters to that need by flattering us...has us eating out of his hands...while we stomp all over the people that are less deserving.

So of his three fallacies....I believe the don't want to...is the fundamental situation.
Every thing else is an excuse.

If we valued every other life as we value our own, we would be living in an entirely different world.

[jaysunb]

9. +1 n/t

[rusty quoin]

7. That's all true

[shadowmayor]

8. Don't settle for the BS

There's no can't in American. Sounds trite, simple, and even childish. But this simple phrase can freeze even the most hard-boiled conservative. It questions their Americanism, their courage, and their belief in what is truly possible. Want to get out of our "crushing" debt. A massive public works program for green energy, high speed rail, better roads, bridges, and dams and watch every federal dollar turn into 5 or 6 or 7 as the money flows through local economies.

There's no can't in American. We won't try because we're too stupid? Not clever enough to figure out complex problems. Tell that to Eisenhower in WWII. Tell that to Thomas Edison. We've been figuring out complex problems and issues for as long as we've been a country. Now you wish to quit. Well, I don't think we're a nation of quitters.

We want a better country, not to keep living in the mess we have today. We owe it to future generations.

There's no can't in American. We're not stupid quitters. We want to take care of our grandchildren. Why are conservatives against any of these ideals? This war of words and ideas can be fought successfully if, as Thomas Frank and others remind us; if we learn to use the right messages.