What if our ability to have a free society is dependent on our ability to restrain ourselves from exercising our freedom through reasona and prudence?
Designs on the Truth points out:
A frequent mantra from talk-show callers, this statement is often followed by “And that’s why I can’t vote for Santorum” or “That’s why I support Ron Paul.”
The proclamation is usually delivered in a measured tone, calculated to convey how very reasonable and rational the speaker is:
“Yes, as an independent thinker I’ve carefully considered past and present socio-economic trends and sagely concluded that conservatism is definitely called for in fiscal matters, but when it comes to morals well, that’s personal, whatever works for you.”
The glaring problem with this theory is that, all historical evidence to the contrary, it assumes a dualistic view of human nature. It says we’re able to behave one way in this area of our lives and the opposite way in this area. That we can be totally unfettered socially, yet totally disciplined in economic matters.
But if we’re generally freewheeling when it comes to our personal lifestyle choices, how do we magically develop restraint or responsibility in fiscal matters?
We don’t. As our friends across the pond are slowly, and painfully, realizing
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment