Page 2 of 3

Re: Does being happy prove you're right?

PostPosted: March 8th, 2009, 4:00 am
by Coyote Goodfellow

Re: Does being happy prove you're right?

PostPosted: March 8th, 2009, 4:58 am
by Coyote Goodfellow

Re: Does being happy prove you're right?

PostPosted: March 8th, 2009, 1:07 pm
by Karen

Re: Does being happy prove you're right?

PostPosted: March 9th, 2009, 8:13 am
by deadwhitemale

Re: Does being happy prove you're right?

PostPosted: March 9th, 2009, 4:06 pm
by john
Completely off-topic, but if you wish to recover your copy of Bad Guys' Quote Book, you can for under a dollar on Amazon.com

Re: Does being happy prove you're right?

PostPosted: March 10th, 2009, 2:08 pm
by Coyote Goodfellow

Re: Does being happy prove you're right?

PostPosted: April 3rd, 2009, 4:24 pm
by cyranorox
Greenberg's inquiry, presuming to 'find the lie', is front-loaded to find, or create, that which he desires. Whiny kids whine in any context; moreover, the idea that conservatives are on the defensive is one of their myths. They hold most of the wealth and position; in my recollection, the conservative kids' parents had more status and power, and the kids took a coloring from that.

I am a sanguine, merry person, and a liberal after the mode of Bellamy, Chesterton and Chrysostom. Neoconmen, money conservatives, and randroids are costive, crabbed, miserly sorts, in my experience, focussed on holding their own, pushing away others as intrusive, and defining freedom as absence of obligation - especially to pay - and stratification by desert. We define freedom principally as absence of want, liberty of expression, and an apophatic stance regarding the merits of others. Most people don't use the word, but it means that, since we cannot sort persons by relative merit or deserving, the differnce in material satisfaction of needs must be mitigated. There are forces that falsely rank people, such as birth, pay, and accident; no one in his right mind believes all men deserve what befalls them.

DWM- re: sun, moon and Stars: if the Haves really hold all these treasures, necessary to life and joy, then the citizens do right to demand that they be shared, even to levelling. Inasmuch as the great owners hold the arable land, the usable airwaves, the reserves of energy beneath the earth, and the waters upon it, mitigated only by our common claims, ie, government, they do, and we should.

Re: Does being happy prove you're right?

PostPosted: April 3rd, 2009, 6:04 pm
by archenland_knight

Re: Does being happy prove you're right?

PostPosted: April 3rd, 2009, 7:40 pm
by Karen

Re: Does being happy prove you're right?

PostPosted: April 3rd, 2009, 8:09 pm
by archenland_knight

Re: Does being happy prove you're right?

PostPosted: April 3rd, 2009, 8:50 pm
by Karen

Re: Does being happy prove you're right?

PostPosted: April 3rd, 2009, 9:14 pm
by john

Re: Does being happy prove you're right?

PostPosted: April 3rd, 2009, 10:02 pm
by cyranorox
I do paint broadly - that was the tenor of the conversation, broad generalizations about temperament and politics.

The perennial problem with private charity is servility and petty tyranny. Those who have, set up criteria to distribute, and it all too often devolves into sob stories, brownnosing and exaggeration on one side; favoritism, bossiness, or intrusion on the other. you start to ask about deserving or undeserving. you give to the articulate, charming, or busy; less to the gruff, angry, or smelly. you start to assess motive. All of this is simply bad. Half of victorian novels seem to deal with this issue, and it's no secret how awful people become when they are giving or asking for money.

much better to set up a common treasury, with objective criteria of need and fixed allowances paid over time. this will assure relatively even and reliable distribution to those in need. since not everyone belongs to the same churches, and we know that wealthy communities have better schools, police, etc. - ie tend to keep money at home - the broadest gathering is best. since we are governed by representatives [not Government in the old world sense], we do it by taxation. As I've often said, this is basic civics and neither liberal nor radical.

It's also not perfect; it is good for private charities to supplement the public distribution. one major use for private charity organizations is to assist the poor to use the public system, get signed up, deal with the forms and deadlines, etc. Again, nothing new or strange.

Re: Does being happy prove you're right?

PostPosted: April 4th, 2009, 4:15 am
by archenland_knight

Re: Does being happy prove you're right?

PostPosted: April 13th, 2009, 10:37 am
by Xara