Mankind has always known a struggle between opposing world views. Think of the choice offered to Adam and Eve: stay in a sheltered partnership of law and order or venture into the unknown armed with your god-like wits. Many long years later, conservative vs liberal conflict can give balance to existence or cause bitter discord and separation.
People get ideas and beliefs from their families, from education, and from circumstances of childhood. As they enter into adult freedom and responsibility, these ideas may change. Remember the student demonstrations of the sixties? Many a former hippie has given up extremely liberal views as he or she matures, enters the workforce, and raises a family.
A good example is how people manage money. Many young adults find that generous credit limits on unsolicited cards lead them into heavy consumer debt. As they mature, they often decide to pay off these high-interest loans, live on a cash basis, and save in advance of need or gratification. This way of regarding spending might encourage right-leaning opinions, at least about government fiscal policies.
Liberals, however, might view present needs as more important than future stability. They want to feed the poor, heal the sick, earn a lot of money with their college education so they can pay high taxes, protect the environment while creating technology to provide new employment opportunities, and still feed off the fat of the land. After all, an ideal society can provide well for all when assets are shared, right?
This kind of thing causes much political unrest in a country. The socialist view that government should take care of the helpless can go too far, some say. If the amount of welfare for a family is more than the breadwinner can earn by working, some see a problem. They also believe that social services offer help too readily. If a person applies for unemployment, the social worker may offer food stamps as well. This angers some taxpayers.
History shows that it is hard for political leaders to balance freedom and compassion, even when these values are paramount. (The records are full of leaders who talked of the common good but who, in reality, sought their own advancement.) People who feel that the government should mandate education of children might truly believe that this is the best way. However, if public policy constrains those who have a different opinion from teaching their own children at home, it smacks of tyranny.
There are other areas besides economics where world views collide. The role of religion in education and public life, public school curriculum and standards, the definition of marriage, energy production, jobs, climate change, and health care are only a few of the reasons for furious debate.
However, conservative vs liberal opinions are equally important if a country is to be healthy and strong. When the balance is skewed one way or another, nations struggle and even fall. We depend on our leaders to see both sides of any question.
People get ideas and beliefs from their families, from education, and from circumstances of childhood. As they enter into adult freedom and responsibility, these ideas may change. Remember the student demonstrations of the sixties? Many a former hippie has given up extremely liberal views as he or she matures, enters the workforce, and raises a family.
A good example is how people manage money. Many young adults find that generous credit limits on unsolicited cards lead them into heavy consumer debt. As they mature, they often decide to pay off these high-interest loans, live on a cash basis, and save in advance of need or gratification. This way of regarding spending might encourage right-leaning opinions, at least about government fiscal policies.
Liberals, however, might view present needs as more important than future stability. They want to feed the poor, heal the sick, earn a lot of money with their college education so they can pay high taxes, protect the environment while creating technology to provide new employment opportunities, and still feed off the fat of the land. After all, an ideal society can provide well for all when assets are shared, right?
This kind of thing causes much political unrest in a country. The socialist view that government should take care of the helpless can go too far, some say. If the amount of welfare for a family is more than the breadwinner can earn by working, some see a problem. They also believe that social services offer help too readily. If a person applies for unemployment, the social worker may offer food stamps as well. This angers some taxpayers.
History shows that it is hard for political leaders to balance freedom and compassion, even when these values are paramount. (The records are full of leaders who talked of the common good but who, in reality, sought their own advancement.) People who feel that the government should mandate education of children might truly believe that this is the best way. However, if public policy constrains those who have a different opinion from teaching their own children at home, it smacks of tyranny.
There are other areas besides economics where world views collide. The role of religion in education and public life, public school curriculum and standards, the definition of marriage, energy production, jobs, climate change, and health care are only a few of the reasons for furious debate.
However, conservative vs liberal opinions are equally important if a country is to be healthy and strong. When the balance is skewed one way or another, nations struggle and even fall. We depend on our leaders to see both sides of any question.
No comments:
Post a Comment