tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5090403.post735042852156433635..comments2023-09-07T04:24:11.648-06:00Comments on y-intercept blog: On the Redistribution of Incomey-intercepthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5090403.post-25914185126244342792009-11-14T01:25:50.584-07:002009-11-14T01:25:50.584-07:00egb, Hegel's philosophy of history is a little...egb, Hegel's philosophy of history is a little more complex than the simple thesis/antithesis/catharsis model. Hegel's real aim was to create a "scientific model" that a historicist could use to understand, predict and possibly control change in history.<br /><br />Historicism seeks to model and eventually control change.<br /><br />So, the well engineered CHANGE campaign is really the best example of Hegelian thought in action.<br /><br />The formula of the campaign was used by Lenin, Moa, Stalin, Hitler, Hessein, Tito, Chavez, and many others. All of these people rose to power on the backs of a change campaign that followed carefully orchestrated agitation by a well organized community of activists.<br /><br />There are interesting things in Obama's rise to power. For example, he gave a speech about how the Constitution was fundamentally flawed because it did not include "redistributive justice." <br /><br />Redistributed justice is not consistent with individual rights because redistributive justice involves taking away from people in the targetted groups to give to people in the politically preferred groups.<br /><br />There is an intrinsic thesis/antithesis style conflict when one pushes redistributed justice as a right.<br /><br />On the dialectical front: Several chapters in "The Audacity of Hope" had the form of Obama waxing eloquant about the free market. He would then end the chapter with a "but" and simply leave the audience hanging about how he would resolve the conflict between freedom and redistributed social justice.<br /><br />Conversely, there is very little talk in the book about building a society based on fundamental premises.y-intercepthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5090403.post-85972370459548548992009-11-13T15:03:19.014-07:002009-11-13T15:03:19.014-07:00Hegel is "thesis, antithesis and synthesis&qu...Hegel is "thesis, antithesis and synthesis". What particular dialectics are O using? Can you give some specifics?egbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05789076407102220586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5090403.post-44805057271388928662009-11-13T09:09:17.269-07:002009-11-13T09:09:17.269-07:00The history of Germany, China (and other states fo...The history of Germany, China (and other states for that matter) show the evolution of the process.<br /><br />Hegel created the dialectics. Marx used it to united the ends against the middle.<br /><br />Hitler was uniting the newly disenfranchised german middle class against the ends. This is the reason that lefties equate the Nazi and Republican party. <br /><br />Mao was more interesting. He united the ends against the middle in his first revolution, then united the youth against those who survived the first revolution.<br /><br />Tito was a master at uniting ethic group against ethnic group. Hussein rose to power uniting ends against the middle and maintained power by brutally uniting ethnic group against ethnic group.<br /><br />The evolution of dialectics pretty much always devolves into centuries of hardship for the people as the ruling class uses the method to united people against eachother to maintain their absolute power.<br /><br />Why our universities are so thoroughly married to the method is beyond me.y-intercepthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5090403.post-38016342209526978362009-11-12T20:25:26.558-07:002009-11-12T20:25:26.558-07:00The consolidation of the ends against the middle i...The consolidation of the ends against the middle is precisely what happened in Germany beginning the the run-up to WWI and concluding with WWII. Hitler was simply the guy that happened to be in the right place and have the right kind of understanding to take advantage of it.Scott Hinrichshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11831447472339880148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5090403.post-1724459144721370922009-11-10T09:22:34.463-07:002009-11-10T09:22:34.463-07:00The challenge for conservatives is that they have ...The challenge for conservatives is that they have to figure out how to counter the slogan of 'redistributed-wealth.' The way to do it is point out the slogan as a slogan. <br /><br />The dynamics of the progressive era is that progressives will centralize power under the claim that this will redistribute wealth. Centralization of power, of course, leads to economic centralization which concentrates wealth.<br /><br />The stategy of pitting the ends against the middle doesn't elevate the lower class but eestroys the middle class and eliminates the possibility of social mobility. <br /><br />The progressives play a sick game. <br /><br />If people realized the nature of the game, they would reject it.y-intercepthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03389285761013186443noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5090403.post-9888589094116136092009-11-10T01:23:15.242-07:002009-11-10T01:23:15.242-07:00The problem with "redistribution of wealth&qu...The problem with "redistribution of wealth" is that when a liberal says it, we all know that he means to take wealth from those who have earned it and give it to those who have not. Liberals (progressives) have been doing that since TR and Wilson invented wealth redistribution. Liberals use the force of government to do it.<br /><br />I agree the phrase "redistribution of wealth" isn't evil in and of itself. However, when Obama says it, he moves lots of people to action. Same for Pelosi, and Reid. If Buffet said it, we would be investing our money with him because he has a different purpose.<br /><br />If conservatives want to win elections, they need to confront social problems. Traditionally, they have not done this. Examples are Health care, inner cities and education. Conservatives need to use the concept of little or no government involvement to solve these problems. All are solvable with very little government control, but no one seems to want to focus on solutions to problem that don't involve huge government participation.<br /><br />Should such non-government solutions arise, wealth will redistribute itself without any guns or laws to help it.egbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05789076407102220586noreply@blogger.com