Sunday, March 3, 2013
In the ongoing battle of ideologies, Liberal versus Conservative, as currently defined, Conservatives continue to lose ground when it comes to definitions. In some fights, they simply surrender the fight without even firing a verbal volley. The lead cause for the hesitation to properly express their convictions, while working to strengthen the definitions and ideals that are used to portray them, is fear. Political Correctness censors them, concerns about being labeled a racist, homophobic, bigot, or any other expression of villainy by the thought police stills their tongues. People are forced to walk on egg shells, or risk being persecuted and vilified by the press. The mainstream media has made an art of sensationalizing the statements of conservatives, while down playing those of liberals. The bi-polar nature of their actions is a sad example of cognitive dissonance. However, while the media acts like the town crier, and is not without blame, the true tragedy of the situation is the utter lack of moral fortitude from our supposed Conservative leaders. By allowing liberal ideology to control the conversation, determining the wording and definitions that form the substance of our society, they have abandoned the field. The populace mast gather behind them and either hold them to task, or replace them with better candidates. The following are an examination of a few of the current talking points about which the representatives of either side bicker, presented for consideration and debate.
Affirmative action is not equivalent to equal opportunity. In an effort to assuage guilt for past atrocities, and create a statistic which can be brandished with glee, the government has created the unintended consequence of replacing emotional bias with a persistent government enforced bias. With threats of force, our government has instilled the idea that the work force should be mathematically comparable to the entire population. If the ratios do not coincide, then charges of discrimination are levied. Heavy legal action follows, the mysteriously infinite funds of the government brought to bear against the finite pocket of the accused. Quite aware of the possibility of financial ruin, institutions go out of their way to meet the invisible quotas. When comparing the qualifications of two individuals, the one of lesser merit may win out if they serve to improve the institutions statistical appearance. This decision isn’t made because it will improve the company. If they had chosen the better qualified applicant, they would have been in a stronger economic position. No, this choice was made solely to placate the beast that our government has become.
Through force, government has lowered the bar for acceptance that must be met, not just for those who enjoy a favored minority status, but for everyone. Why strive to be better if less is accepted? Efforts of favoritism serve to discredit the work of everyone. We have arrived at a point where it is considered appropriate to judge people by the color of their skin, or by their gender, before considering their character.
If someone entered the country without official documentation, they have broken the law and are here illegally. While credit should be given for their attempt to improve their lot in life, their willful violation of the laws of this country is an affront to everyone who abides by them to enter. Companies that employ these illegal immigrants, often at rates much less than they could pay a legal citizen, should be held accountable. States and local governments that abide the invasion, either by ignoring their presence or actively funding them through social services, must be held accountable for those choices. For the Federal government to ignore the porous nature of our nation’s borders, to the point of near abdication of its responsibility to protect them, is inexcusable. However, by employing illegal immigrants, companies can maintain the price of their product or service artificially low, since they can pay the workers less. Further, since the preponderance of illegal immigrants are of Hispanic origin, and the continued growth and importance of the Hispanic voting bloc, our Politicians generally view the situation as a venue for personal gain. Talk of amnesty of is applauded, while direction for state and federal agencies to not enforce the law is quietly ignored. The foremost impact of unregulated immigration is an increased demand on social services, without the corresponding tax dollars to fund it. Swaths of our country are surrendered to drug and human trafficking. American citizens suffer trespasses, theft, and destruction of property, yet when they attempts to mount a defense are confounded with litigation and liberal outcries. States that move to respond to the Federal government’s abandonment on the issue are suddenly confronted by with claims of pre-emption, the federal government defending its continuous inaction by claiming only it can take action.
Despite the financial and sociological ruin wrought by this invasion, it would be a legislative and economic disaster if we attempted mass deportation. For all the evils it causes, there is a strong subset of the illegal alien population that provide a positive contribution to the American society and economy, aside from their willful violation of immigration law. Their sudden withdraw from the workforce would have an abrupt impact: assuming that the positions these people hold provide a lower wage because illegal immigrants are available to fill them, the salaries would have to be raised to attract citizens. The resultant rise in salaries will give rise to the prices seen at the consumer end, echoing through the economy. Even if the assumption is false, and there is a sudden increase in available jobs, that doesn’t address the feasibility of detaining and deported the untold millions of illegal aliens. It is not logistical supportable; there are not enough personnel in the state or federal agencies combined, not even considering the social outcry that would rise in response to the images of government agents going door to door in their search. Rage would flow from the entire ideological spectrum, Liberals claiming human rights violations, Conservatives claiming it is a warning of future government encroachments on the rights of citizens. Even if they could be identified and arrested, where would we detain them for processing? How would we arrange for their return to the country of Citizenship? Even more confounding, what would we do with the ones that were refused re-entry, detain them from now to eternity?
Considering the nigh impossible task of removing all of them, against the mammoth burden some have placed on social services, we should address the latter, given its higher chances of success. Turning from the subset of illegal immigrants that are industrious or demonstrate a will to be productive members of society, we should target the rest of the population: the dregs, those with qualities more akin to parasites. Hardened predators that delight in the suffering of others, oppressing their communities through fear. It is this subset that inflicts the overt destruction from the illegal immigrant community and society at large. Aside from the villainous nature, the worst consequence of their existence is the manner in which they propagate. Through their action, the promise and opportunities for prosperity others might have had is disrupted, a wake of broken dreams left by their passing. For every feel good story of personal triumph over adversity, there is a though of what more they could have achieved if unhindered, of the others that weren’t even that lucky. Amongst the pestilence, there is the weed, those that produce no benefit and cause little harm, but exist as a continuous drain on society. They thrive in their dependency and subsist on charity and hand outs stolen from the efforts of producers by the government under the threat of force. So that the industrious may flourish, the pestilence must be eradicated, and weeds starved out. A focused effort of policing to disrupt the pestilence where it festers, strengthening the community so that it may be more resilient in the future. That sense of community must be fostered, so a chorus of voices will stand in response against the spread of the pestilence, and each individual is better secured in their personal liberties. For the weeds, sever them from the government provided hand outs. They have no entitlement to the services of government as illegal immigrants, no claim to the wealth generated by the labors of another. Bereft of the gentle succor, they will either develop into a productive member of the community and prosper, or descend into criminal acts and suffer. The analogy of pestilence, weeds, and blossoming prosperity is not the province of the illegal immigrants solely. The same can be said of humanity and its entirety, with the same resultant recourse.
In parks and forests nationwide, there are prominent signs prohibiting the feeding of wild animals. The basis is the accepted, and demonstrated, fact that visitors providing food to the animals will lead to a condition of dependence forming. They cease to be self reliant, focusing instead on the easy meals provided for them. Why hunt when it is easier to wait to be fed? Further, the animals will associate humans with easy food, and engage them for more food. Then there is the shift, when the easy meal supply slackens. The now dependent animals, hungry yet bereft of the skills to provide for themselves, will follow the association of humans with food, and strike out. This demonstrated cycle of dependency has been seen several times over, yet people fail to make the connection to the impact of welfare and similar entitlements.
It is appropriate to assist the down trodden in their time of need. However, this period should not be allowed to continue uninterrupted to perpetuity. It cannot progress to the point where they wallow in dependency, turning from ambition and initiative. For those that devour without production, allowance can be made for private charities, where an individual gives freely of his production, for that work is his by the right of his labor and he can dispense with it as he deems appropriate. However, the use of government force to redistribute the worth of his efforts into the hands of the unproductive is a violation of his property rights, and not within the scope of a just government. When it is understood that wealth can be more easily gained through accruing government favor than personal effort, the louse will take the gentler road, exchanging his vote, his voice, and eventually his liberty. Politicians who promise such trinkets will gain the blind support of the dependent. Seeing the easy reward offered under government favor, sloth will spread throughout the populace, until the receivers outnumber the producers. It will be at that critical juncture that the system established by government favor and the redistribution of another’s wealth will begin to collapse. Then, the shame of government will erode, replaced by anarchy and tyranny, the calm of despotism within a storm of upheaval.
As recently demonstrated, our society has passed the point where this malfeasance can be corrected promptly at the national level. The uninformed are far happy to exchange long term suffering for short term joys. The reigning politicians reflect this reality, sharing the same short sighted perspective as there constituents. Before the whole can prosper, the rot within must be corrected. Conservative ideals must be reintroduced to the country, personal responsibility must be rewarded, and utter dependence is shamed.
All of mankind’s great advancements can be attributed to the work produced by an individual, or the concerted efforts of many individuals. These efforts created wealth, enriching the community. Conversely, those that produce nothing are a blight on society.
What proceeded were concepts, ideals that I hold as conservative beliefs on a couple of issues that are currently facing the country. Sadly, there are several more issues facing the nation, so there will be more commentaries to follow.