Ignorance on Parade

Words fail.

Is this what America is becoming–a society where the search for knowledge that is ultimately what makes us human–is displaced by training for worker ants?


  1. You don’t get something for nothing. We want non-“hard” science emphasis? More knowledge for the sake of knowledge? Less than “threadbare” funding for the spectrum of benefits for any and all of our citizenry (and anybody who drifts in)?

    Then sooner or later, does the necessary increased production relative to these wants come into question and analysis? Aren’t we a little busy now trying to accomodate both documented and perceived rights to this or that? Do we ever consider that when we’re part of a pack, trying to outrun someone gaining on us in some distant plain, or we’re making shoes and the other guy has much cheaper labor costs- that our competition doesn’t give a whit about out “rights” and “justice”?

    Last I recall, China has, (what- 40%?) of their populace that are still agrarian, little-educated, genuinely poor citizens who are not benefiting from the explosion in manufacturing, raising the standard of living for much of their populace. Do they appear to be overwhelmed with guilt that their economic ascendance doesn’t raise all their own boats equally, let alone give a rat’s behind if the U.S. is meeting our percieved standard in caring for every, single, last occupant of our country? Do you think the next economically skyrocketing nation will sympathize any more about our national plight?

    If governmental economics is a balance, it doesn’t apprear to ever be perfect, and definitely subject to interpretation. But I would think we agree we’re out of balance. I would argue from our delusions stemming from our days of unchallenged affluence.

    I think egalitarianism is a wonderful aspiration, but contingent upon a uniformity of behavior our species hasn’t achieved. We should ask the inherent individualism across our species to take a back seat to mandated redistribution, without commensurate productivity- or we are who we are and lend a helping hand as our competition and individualsim permits?

  2. Equal results are not necessary, but everyone should have the opportunity to work to their potential, achieving at least minimum subsistence and hopefully much more.

    If other nations permit exports of toxic and child or slave labor-produced materials and foods to us, then our markets should be closed to them. If they wish renewed access, then tariffs should be high until they prove sustained trustworthiness.

    We still have a better standard of living and more purchasing power per capita than so many other countries whose companies WANT American buyers for their goods and services.

    Might other countries retaliate? Perhaps, but maybe we’ll have to start making more things right here in America if that happens. Besides, in a free market with free information, importers who poison, exploit and enslave can find it awfully hard to make sales when their unsavory practices are exposed.

    While we still have economic leverage in the international marketplace, we should use it to protect the health and welfare (as well as the jobs) of Americans. It seems a clear case of use it or lose it. Who knows – with some moral leadership to do the right thing, we might also protect our international brothers and sisters and their children too.

Comments are closed.