Does liberalism contribute to the social problems of crime and family breakdown? Well yes it does. Sean wants me to back up my claim, so here goes. Sean et al, please consider the following as the beginning of a discussion rather than an outright claim of proof.
Let us start with family breakdowns. Generally speaking, liberals want to help people who are having difficulties, albeit with other people's money. Such a view leads to policy choices. One of the most pernicious and harmful to families is what most call "welfare." One of the consequences of welfare was that men became expendable as the government became the provider for single women and their children. Perverse incentives resulted wherein there were financial incentives to have children and remain unmarried. The result, predictably, was more single parents, more men with fewer responsibilities, more fatherless children.
Now crime. Again liberals have a soft spot for the downtrodden and this leads to policy choices. With respect to crime, liberals tend to hold society to blame for the bad behavior committed by criminals, well, unless they are white collar criminals. This mindset leads to excuse making/blaming of others rather than holding people accountable for their own behavior. This is particularly harmful for children to be fed the ideology that they live in a society bent on oppressing them. Thus bad behavior will not be "nipped in the bud" but rather will be seen and perhaps inadvertently encouraged as a sort of protest against society. As far as policy goes, this mindset contributes to laws that allow criminals to walk because of technicalities, light sentences, comfy prisons etc... that make criminal activity a more attractive option.
In both cases, liberalism fosters irresponsibility. When indeed we get irresponsibility, why should we be surprised?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Indeed, sometimes it seems the 'State' supports and protects the person who makes bad decisions and shows irresponsibility. Sort of like the unions.
What a combination!
For now I'll leaving aside the merit (which I believe is some) of your simplistic arguments as a cause for the social ills you identified as the cause of the under-performing student population.
Denis, you said "Milwaukee, Racine etc... are places where liberalism has dominated for a longer period of time, thus there are additional problems of family breakdown, crime etc... that exacerbate the problems in the school system."
The "liberal policies" you blame, are/were for the most part implemented at the state and federal levels and are therefore, not local in application.
Please explain how "they have dominated for a longer period of time" in places like "Milwaukee, Racine." What is it about those places that lead to this occurrence? Is there some attribute that they share that caused these conditions to arrise in these particular places and not others?
sean, it could be that these areas just started with a larger tax* of liberals than those found out-state. More likely is that these areas, because of their populations and economies, held more power that other areas and power is the thing liberals love the most. Power brings liberals like moths to a flame.
*A pod of whales.
A herd of cattle.
A tax of liberals.
Know your group names!
Sean, if you think my argument is simplistic but with merit, why not offer a sophisticated, highly nuanced counterargument. Use French if you really want to impress.
Anyway, liberalism has infected all levels of government. With respect to welfare for example, we have a triple whammy here in Racine. Federal policy, administered by a state, Wisconsin, known for its generous welfare program that attracted dependents to Wisconsin, many of whom naturally settled in places like Racine that just couldn't , and still can't, get enough government dependents. A current example of Racine's harmful liberalism is our tendency to embrace any subsidized low income housing proposal. So naturally we get people unable to take care of themselves and the associated social ills that contribute to the problems in our schools.
So where am I wrong Sean?
Dancin Denis, still shufflin around instead of answering the question eh? Not to worry, the gravitational pull of the truth has got you circling in ever closer. Your orbit of avoidance is in inexorable decay.
Please explain why "they (liberal policies) have dominated for a longer period of time" in places like "Milwaukee" and "Racine", leading to "the embace of any LOW INCOME housing proposal."
But more importantly and to the ultimate point, please re-read your statement; "So naturally we get people unable to take care of themselves and the associated SOCIAL ILLS that contribute to the problems in our schools."
Now in light of your statements above, please explain to all how it's the Ubiquitous Unions and the Pervasive Public schools, successful elsewhere, that are the problem and not the locally unique conditions of concentrated "LOW INCOME" (poverty) and "ASSOCIATED SOCIAL ILLS" that are at the root of the problem of under-performing student populations in these places.
In reality, you needn't bother. I've used your own words to pin you down sufficiently and establish the real problems that students in Racine and Milwaukee are faced with. But you might want to give a little thought to our history of racism and the concentration of poor minorities in these places and how those REALITIES factor in.
Only then will you be able to recognize the Unions and Public Schools for the false ideological scapegoats that they are. Perhaps then you'll make the ultimate leap to understanding how Falsity and Scapegoats are core requirements of the Con that is the Modern Con Movement.
With the length of the Seamy posts, at least Denis is keeping him from actually doing anything. I heard that the Mayor is looking for a new corridor development associate/expert.
I have not nor am I now dodging your question Sean. Moreover, you haven't really even disagreed with me. Rather, you seem to seek an exemption for unions for their part in contributing to the mess of our public schools. The teachers union especially also favors very liberal social policies that you and I seem to agree contribute to crime and broken families and thereafter problems in schools. Couple this with a permissive attitude toward discipline, a disdain for absolute values, and a focus on pay, benefits etc... instead of teaching and you have the mess we find ourselves in. Sean, for some reason you want to tease out unions from liberalism. It ain't possible, they are one in the same. As such, where you find liberalism, you will find unionism and you will find greater social problems. I look forward to another brilliant and sophisticated rebuttal.
Sean - are you kidding me? I take it you don't know the history of SE Wisconsin.
Google Frank Zeidler - his policies were the foundation for much of what transpired in SE Wisconsin in the 60s and 70s. The most recent socialist mayor in the country.
Then talk to anyone who remembers what a welfare magnet state Wisconsin was in the 60s, 70s and 80s until Thompsons reforms were initiated. I do - I, and family members, worked within a part of the system.
Why did welfare recipients gravitate to SE Wisconsin and settle in this area - this is almost too simple - because of the ease of proximity to the Illinois border. You are aware, are you not, that thousands were setting up residency in Wisconsin simply to get their welfare check while still collecting either a paycheck or other state issued funding from Illinois? While human baby factories churned out as many potential "paychecks" as they could in Wisconsin, boyfriends or daddies kept residency and/or jobs in Illinois.
And if you don't understand the connection between the liberal/socialist policy of welfare and the breakdown of, particularly the black family, in this country, and it's subsequent effect on the quality of education, then I'm going to begin to believe you've suffered a frontal lobe injury at some point in your life.
omg, liberals are the downfall of the entire country? anyone with a brain is well aware that blanket statements like that carry no weight.
It's like saying Abe Lincoln freed the slaves because of his "historic" Emancipation Proclamation, lol.
Post a Comment