26 Mar 2012

Why Conservatives and Progressives Are Both Right and Wrong

Climate Change, Conspiracy, Drug War, ECON MOMENT, Economics, Foreign Policy, Shameless Self-Promotion 10 Comments

10 Responses to “Why Conservatives and Progressives Are Both Right and Wrong”

  1. Ken B says:

    I thought the second half fell flat becaue Bob overlooked a key point: the Left sees *themselves* as the government officials who will run the domestic apparatus. They see the foreign policy officials as the other, the military/industrial complex. No connection.

  2. Jason B says:

    Making Bob’s case to a progressive shouldn’t be too hard. Consider what the general perception of what Obama was going to be from a foreign policy standpoint versus what Bush was. We thougt he was going to be much better on civil liberties with regards to the security state apparatus, that he wouldn’t ratchet up new wars, and that he’d generally be more “constitutionally” inclined from a policy perspective. Instead what we got from Obama is even worse than what Bush did. Obama has assassinated multiple American citizens in total secrecy, started wars without any Congressional approval, and enhanced the security state beyond what he inherited from Bush. So if you’re talking to a progressive from that perspective, the guy he thought was going to overturn, or at least stop, the evils of the Bush administration, is now in fact worse than Bush. That case alone should be enough to persuade any reasonable liberal/progressive on a lot of issues because if they can’t even remotely trust the guy they thought they could trust with regards to wars, assassinations, unlawful secrecies, etc., then how are they going to feel when someone is elected who they don’t trust to have access to their own health records, not to mention the legal precedence of the previous administration(Obama) who has murdered its own citizens in total secrecy, that now the newly elected untrusted executive has those same powers.

    • Loveski says:

      Again, in line with my other post… it is not “government” or “Obama” or even “Bush” that is the problem, it is the invasive corporate influence over our politicians that needs to be fixed. Both of these presidents were able to and driven to do what they due due to corporate influence.

      We cannot simply “get rid of” government… we need to “reform” it, starting with reversing “citizens united” one of the biggest stabs in the back by the corporate strong-hold on our politics. Talk about going in the wrong direction.

      As per Obama’s surprise wrong doings as seen from the left, it seems no one is immune to the influence of money and power coming from the powers that be (oil companies, defense companies, etc).

      Any ideas on how to fix this would be great, but I for one, think that history has proven that tiny or no government is NOT the answer.

      To close, these things will and have always cycled. Government are created, they become corrupt till it pains the people, the people revolt either peacefully or with blood shed to take it back, then they rest on their laurels, the government corrupt and the cycle continues.

      We are currently at a turning point just before a revolt in my opinion. I see this occurring within the next decade or decade and a half.

  3. Matthew Murphy says:

    Hope you will keep cranking out videos at this pace, Bob. I’m loving this.

    • Bob Murphy says:

      Thanks. Maybe not one a day, but definitely a few per week, at least when I’m not traveling.

  4. Davis says:

    Great vid. But I prefer the ones where you are showing skin.

  5. Christopher says:

    Do you think that government programs are incapable of fixing these problems because the bureaucrats just screw up, are dumb or have different agendas anyway? Or do you rather think that it is literally impossible for a central planer to fix these problems even if he was a wise man guided by nothing but virtue?

  6. Tom says:

    Great video.

    Unfortunately, its very hard to convince liberals and conservatives to be consistent in their views on government.

  7. Loveski says:

    Interesting, however from a moderate progressive perspective here is my take on the second half. There are MANY good government programs, but all have been invaded by corruption to some extent (some small and some large). If Bob is advocating small, limited or virtually non-existent government, who is going to protect our country from true enemies should they try to invade, protect us from criminals, help the truly less fortunate (all men are NOT created equal), pave our roads, fight our fires, create laws to keep us safe, etc?

    It is not that I/we don’t trust government when it comes to wars and oil, but do trust them with health care, it’s that we did not like Bush and his cronies… period, no matter what they were involved in. What allowed those terribly unethical people to do what they did was our lack of proper government reform and the intrusion of invasive corporate influence that needs to be removed. The people NEED to take the government back from the corporations and their powerful money influence to corrupt, and put it back in the hands of the common people. We need solid government. Not to eliminate it. Look at history to prove this makes no sense at all.

    Yes, many of these programs need to be fixed… not necessarily eliminated. Although government always becomes corrupt to some extent, the goal should not be anarchy, but to work to keep corruption to a minimum and keep corporate politics from slithering their tentacles into every hallway and decision room. I can name dozens of successful government programs/policies that have benefited the public as a whole.

    As per hating bush and his cronies, this has little to do with a socialized health care system. If you travel frequently, as I do, you would learn in discussing with many people from around the world, that this can be very beneficial and work to the advantage of the greater good. Yes, Bush was a evil jackass, and similar types could take a hold of the health care system (if there was a reason) and corrupt it. But, the free market health care system without adequate regulation is simply NOT working. So again, it is a matter of reforming the systems such that they do not hinder society but help it.

    Here is one example. Change the free handout system to a system that provides basic life necessities in an environment fit for learning and a that teaches a healthy lifestyle, but while creating the desire for any sane person to want to leave it in the past once they get off their feet. So the social “system” is beneficial, if done properly.

    Take for example the following. The national parks, The Hwy dept., the endangered species act, emissions controls on vehicles, the old rules regulating shady investments and derivatives, that… once it was withdrawn in part caused the financial collapse, factory emissions controls requirements, food safety, drinking water regulations, hunting and fishing regulations, etc, etc, etc,. Yes most of these are also corrupt to some extent, but have been enormously beneficial in heading us in the right direction. Fixing them is where we should be focusing our energies… not breaking them down and removing them all together. Imagine if there were no government regulation?? Would the people “self-regulate”? NO! Corporation self regulate and become sustainable?? Of course NOT!

    So you see you NEED government, but we also NEED to keep it in check and keep corporate influence out as best as possible. BTW… I’m not a sheer progressive, but more of a logical, moderate/progressive.

    Do I believe in BIG government? Yes! Do I think it needs to be reformed? Yes! Remember, government is supposed to be an extension of the people… not a separate entity. With 300,000,000 people in the U.S. ANY government will seem big. If you want small government, move to the jungle. If we kept money interests such as those whom influenced bush and his cronies as well as some of Obama’s poor decisions, our government would then work for the people.

    In my opinion, our system of government “was” one of the most successful ever, that was up until the corporation became deeply entwined and has begun sucking the natural resources out of our country for short term, unsustainable profits, rather than educating people the “truth” about finite resources and the need to create a sustainable, profitable, lucrative, healthy, balanced economy. This is what the governments role “should” be if it really had the interests of the people in mind, but it is the other way around.

    Remember… we NEED – “By the people… for the people”… Not, “By the corporation… for the corporation” which is what we have now.

    Any comments are welcome. Any ideas of how a society can function with littler or no government? Knowing that individuals and business cannot self-regulate, what are the other options? Maybe there is no good solution as we are only humans after all. I’m not only open to but would love to hear other ideas.

    Good day!

Leave a Reply