Political Philosophy

Peggy Noonan in the WSJ:

…At Republican conventions they express sympathy for this woman, as they do for those who are entrepreneurial, who start businesses and create jobs and build things. Republicans have, that is, sympathy for taxpayers. But they don’t dwell all that much, or show much expressed sympathy for, the sick mother with the uninsured kids, and the soldier with the shot nerves.

Noonan misses the point. Republicans have as much sympathy for people who are sick, poor or troubled as anyone does. Where Republicans and Democrats differ is in their opinions about how best to help such people. Democrats tend to believe in direct government action as a remedy. Republicans tend to believe that government is often part of the problem, and that better remedies are available through private charity and by pursuing government policies that encourage personal responsibility and economic development.

Noonan is correct, however, that Democrats, particularly national politicians, tend to lack sympathy for entrepreneurs, particularly small-business people who in many areas are victimized by high tax rates and excessive regulation. Government action to reduce such burdens would boost productivity, and therefore wealth, jobs and tax receipts. But Democrats as a group tend to be indifferent or hostile to business people other than those in regulated industries who make large political contributions.

When we bemoan the creation of free-speech zones around conventions, conferences, summits, etc I think it important to remember whose actions made those zones necessary in order to protect the right of free assembly.  

Prior to 1968, such precautions never occurred to anyone, because the culture of the time  abhorred  the idea of actually attacking someone engaged in political activity. For the  narcissistic  lefty boomers, that wasn’t good enough. As individuals gifted with intellects and morals far beyond those of mortal men, they had the inherent right to impose their will on others by force. Ever since then their intellectual progeny have attacked every major political event in the North America.  

Viktor Frankl observed that freedom resulted from the combination of liberty and responsibility. He we see he was correct. People once had the freedom to protest close to conventions and similar gatherings because they behaved responsibly when doing so and protected the rights of others. After leftist extremists developed an utter disdain for the rights of others, they abandoned any concept of responsibility towards others.  

And here we are. This is how freedoms die, not with the loss of liberty but first with the loss of responsibility.  

It is both amusing and disturbing to see people squealing like a victorian matron sighting a mouse whenever someone sees a gun. Honestly, rural America is awash with guns and such communities are far safer than urban areas. If someone cleared a hotel in my hometown because someone walked in with a deer rifle, the laughter would never stop.  

[Update (7:28 9.25.2008): The FBI has determined that “no credible threat” existed in an incident in Denver  separate  from this one that some believed might have triggered this silliness.]