Skip to main content

Evil, According to Republicans and Democrats

Please note that the following thoughts are only my observations. Please consider the evidence you see in the behavior of both parties for yourself.

In our politically polarized climate, I was thinking about how Democrats and Republicans are different, and where those differences come from. Democrats seem to place more hope in institutions, and seek to reform those institutions when there is something wrong in society. Hence, there is more willingness to levy taxes to offer more social services as a support to those with less than others. They see the state as a way to equalize society. Thus, evil, to Democrats, seems to be a social issue: if there is a problem in society--poverty, racism, climate change, etc.--it is a problem with the structure of society and must be addressed as such: repair the system, and you will solve the problem. They are generally accepting of a larger state bureaucracy because they believe that increased accountability within a state structure will prevent evil. It seems to me that this is why communism and utilitarianist governments are on the left politically, because they offer more power to the state.

On the other hand, Republicans seem to place more emphasis on personal responsibility. They claim that the power to improve society is in the hands of the individual. They will often oppose increasing the power of institutions through increased funding and the consequent needed accountability, and they decry large state government. Poverty, racism, climate change, and other problems should be solved by the individual, and the state has little place interfering with individual liberties. Taxes, to Republicans, get in the way of the individual of spending his or her money as that person sees fit. In fact, those who believe still in Reagan economics feel that fewer taxes will lift up the rest of society--including the poor--because those with wealth will spend it to improve the overall economy. Evil, to Republicans, is a personal issue that must be solved personally and not through the state. This is why a hands-off approach to the economy ("laissez faire" economics) is appealing to Republicans.

Of course, there are exceptions to this. Some Republicans want increased state controls on abortion clinics and other areas related to morality, for instance (though, even here, you will hear cries to "defund Planned Parenthood," which offers abortion). All in all, though, it seems like one of the most fundamental difference between Democrats and Republicans is their views of the source of evil.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A White Post-Christmas

I just came back from my brother's renewal of vows. He lives in Wisconsin, and this particular week, they experienced colder-than-average temperatures. I could tell because my hands began to go numb as I attempted to tie down a trailer after last night's reception. As a result, I appreciated the fact that the temperature in Stockton was in the mid-sixties when I came back. It was, however, good to take part in this, a dream of my brother and sister-in-law, after at least two years without seeing them. I saw the incredible support of their friends, who helped set up the day before, took part on the day of the event, and stayed late to help clean up. Aware of how tired everyone was late last night, one of Chris's friends even lent Chris his truck to take the last of the decorations home, a favor that allowed the family to return home before two o'clock in the morning last night. Here are some of the highlights: 1. Hearing on a plane what sounded like a baby's fi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Heroes

Although we have several examples of heroes in our day, one of the best known is of a woman named Agnes Gonxhe Bojaxhiu (“Gonja Bojaju”), who devoted her life to sustaining the “poor, sick, orphaned, and dying.” Her venue was Calcutta, India, where she served as a teacher until she began to take notice of the poverty there. Seeking to do something about it, she began an organization that consisted of just thirteen members at its inception. Called the “Missionaries of Charity,” the organization would eventually burgeon into well over 5,000 members worldwide, running approximately 600 missions, schools and shelters in 120 countries; and caring for the orphaned, blind, aged, disabled, and poor. As her personal work expanded, she traveled to countries like Lebanon, where she rescued 37 children from a hospital by pressing for peace between Israel and Palestine; to Ethiopia, where she traveled to help the hungry; to Chernobyl, Russia, to assist victims of the nuclear meltdown there; and to ...
2 comments
Read more

The Nice Guy Fallacy

I read part of a poem recently by one of my favorite poets. It reads: I envy not in any moods The captive void of noble rage The linnet born within the cage That never knew the summer woods. I envy not the beast that takes His license in the field of time Unfetter'd by the sense of crime To whom a conscience never wakes. Nor what may call itself as bles't The heart that never plighted troth But stagnates in the weeds of sloth Nor any want-begotten rest. I hold it true, whate'er befall I feel it, when I sorrow most 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. At base, Tennyson contrasted a life of risk, and consequent pain, with one of security. He sides conclusively with the life of risk, and says he fails to envy those who have faced no hardship. I agree with him; and, for good or ill, his words are just as relevant today as they were in the nineteenth century. Like then, there are those today who choose to live their lives with as little risk as...
2 comments
Read more