Contributed by: filbert Friday, July 30 2010 @ 07:18 AM CST
This would be the “us” as opposed to the “them” of the Ruling Class. The difference is that people in the People Class don’t want to run anyone else’s life–they just want to be free to run their own lives to the best of their abilities. The people in the Ruling Class think that they’re qualified to tell the rest of us how to run their lives–up to and including demanding that the People Class give money to the Ruling Class because they’re somehow “owed” some kind of reparations to make things more “fair.” So yes, the Angry Poor are, in fact, part of the Ruling Class, not of the People Class, in that they think they have the right to order other people to provide for their “needs.”
This is the fundamental political issue of our time–despite what the journalists and “opnion-makers” (but I repeat myself) in the Ruling Class would have you believe.
The issue IS the Ruling Class, and more specifically, how long the People Class will continue to put up with their increasingly shrill and unreasonable demands. Cover Photo for Governor Palin’s New Book Revealed [*2]
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Should Go–It’s time to let gays serve openly in the military [*5] — Nobody’s asking you to like it . . . but if you liked everything everyone else said, we wouldn’t need a First Amendment either, would we? This is where the pro-gay people trip up. Yeah, gay people should be perfectly free–but so should everyone else, and that means tolerating the civil expression of disapproval–of speech, of political orientation, of sexual orientation. What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. You can’t have “gay rights” without at the same time allowing other people the right to approve or disapprove as their consciences direct. That’s called freedom, and that’s why freedom is not easy, and must be constantly defended.
Krugman contra Hayek [*8]
The choice [*10]
A Liberaltarian Reader [*12] — “Liberaltarians” are, I fear, a bit like unicorns . . . very pretty, nice to think about, but don’t really exist in the real world. At least until we re-redefine the word “liberal” to mean what it once did–what we now call “classical liberal.” Libertarians need to stop calling themselves “libertarians” and start calling themselves what they are: Freedom-centrists.
A Liberaltarian Reader? [*13]