Dr. Forbush Thinks

The conservative political organizations have been organized in the past to pick particular topics and issues and concentrate on them until it appears that everyone is talking about the topic or issue. This agenda pops up all over the radio dial and all over the blogosphere. The opposition to the right then is forced to argue the submitted agenda and in return they lose some time that could be devoted to pushing their own agenda.

Today on the way to work I turned on Rush Limbaugh and heard him talking about “fairness.” Earlier in the morning I read a column by George Will entitled “The Case for Conservatism.” George Will also talks about the liberal idea of fairness.

It shouldn’t be surprising that Progressives would be talking about fairness. After all, the history of progress has been a succession of triumphs over the ruling class resulting in making my opportunities for the lower class, thus creating a middle class of people that have some opportunities that were once reserved for the ruling class. Peasants gradually won the ability to own land, vote and take part in politics. Each of these bits of progress gradually making life more fair for more people.

The common theme between these two presentation of the “facts” is that fairness is the antithesis of freedom. The conservatives want freedom and the liberals want fairness. In light of the piece that I wrote yesterday on values, I would suggest that both of these things are values, and they are not necessarily exclusive of each other.

Freedom is a wonderful concept, but my freedom ends at the tip of your nose is the common succinctly put limitation on our freedoms. And, juxtaposing these two values as exclusive rights makes us see into the mind of a conservative. It is quite clear that laws that limit a member of the upper class from taking advantage of a member of the lower class limits the freedom of the upper class person and limits the freedom of the lower class person. In this way, it is quite clear why George Will and Rush Limbaugh both see this issue the way that they do.

So, the question is not whether we value freedom or fairness for the poor. Because this argument suggests that the common man would lose his freedom if we make laws requiring fairness being applied to the poor and working class. But, the freedom that is being taken away is the freedom to exploit these people.

In reality freedom is not a universal value that the conservatives will fight to the death over. This is clear when we look at the USA Patriot Act that severely limited the average person’s freedom. But the limitation of our freedom in this case was in an effort to protect property of the wealthy. So, the two values in question became the value of property and the value of freedom. And, as I pointed out in yesterday’s piece, the question isn’t whether freedom or property were important values, but whether property should be placed above freedom in priority.

The point here is that these issues are continuously brought to the debate and the options are offered to us as if there is a black and white answer to the question - Is it freedom or fairness? But, the answer is not one or the other, but a priority between the two. Conservatives win if people believe that liberals are against freedom. But, if progressives can point out that fairness for more is just a continuation of the progressive movement which results in more freedom for more people in the long run. Even if it takes freedom away from those who have made their riches on raping the poor.







-----------------------------------------------------





Don't forget what Stephen Colbert said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."


Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit



Reflection