Negative Liberty
Freedom seems to be the core of our American discord and from my point of view, it is a misinterpretation of Isaiah Berlin’s idea of negative liberty. For example, if you understand Berlin’s negative liberty as the absence of obstacles or barriers and you immediately associate barriers with government imposing restrictions on your rights, such as your right to automatic firearms then you are likely a Libertarian Conservative. That noted, if you immediately imaged these obstacles/barriers were a systemic part of unfettered capitalism or outdated social order you are likely a liberal progressive. Where the two ideas meet is where Americans must unite against that which threatens our ability to rationally debate the validity of our disagreements.
To illustrate the difference, a conservative might read Atlas Shrugged and think, “Wow, what a great example of how a giant government can over regulate/burden industry.” A progressive might read Atlas Shrugged and think, “Wow, what a great example of how special interests were allowed to influence government.” Now both groups can easily agree that the book creates the impression that industry would not survive such government interference, but the difference is in where they believe that inference in born from. A conservative might believe it is inherent to an over-sized government, while a progressive may believe it was because there was no law/regulation preventing the special interest from overtly influencing government workings.
We should all know by now that our Congressional representatives will probably spend half of his or her working hours dialing for dollars in secret phone bank near Capitol Hill. We should also know by now that our representatives are not calling the average American. Sure, your email box may be full of requests for financial help, but you are probably not getting called directly by your congressional representative simply because you are too poor. Yep, I wrote it; you are too poor to garner anything but your representatives empty promises. The fact that half their time is asking for funds cannot be dismissed as partisan; it is exactly not partisan. Such a corruption of our system is why a joint Princeton and Northwestern University study found that the opinions of the bottom 90% of income earners in America have statistically a “ non-significant impact,” on how congress will vote. They simply do not care what 90% of us think or want.
One may be hard pressed to find a better example of representatives not caring what you think as does the debate over universal health care. Most, I repeat MOST Americans believe we need a universal health care system; but even the Democrats own presidential nominee thinks enacting such a sweeping change is a pipe dream. The fact that every other advanced country in world has some kind of universal health care and we are the richest country in the world, should at the very least make one ask “why is such a thing a pipe dream?”
Before I lose some of my hard core Libertarian friends who think the role of the government is only to protect us from foreign invaders such as humans from other countries/aliens from space, but not from disease, I ask them to consider such a distinction a untenable paradox. Once you think it is the governments job to protect us from hostile creatures you must also consider the hypocrisy of trying to predict the size and/or intelligence of the threat. Regardless of their size, from virus sized threats to a science fiction grown planet eater, if you think it is at least part of your governments job to protect you from invaders who may be harboring ill will/disease, then you’re not an anarchist; you see some need for a government intervention/protection.
Of course this idea of government protection also includes your financial interests. The government must protect its citizens from those who wish to steal one’s hard earned income. For example imagine you’ve bought a little cafe down a little road on the outskirts of a quaint little town and all is going well until a Starbucks coffee shop bought both sides of the street and blocked the road to get to your cafe, essentially cutting off any patrons from your business. You would want the government to intercede upon your behalf. Or let us imagine banks could legally confiscate your entire savings of $100,000 if you were late and overdrawn on a $6 payment to Hulu. While this is extreme, the point is that we must perhaps begrudgingly, admit some government regulation/protection is necessary for a market, for a society to flourish.
The truth is that everyday our government is at least trying to protect us from financial fraud and other financial pitfalls and I for one applaud such protection. I am glad I do not have to imagine a country where a Public utility burned down my home and place of work and could simply shrug off/ignore their negligence. We all appreciate some form of government protection and while I think regulations protect those/that without a voice, I understand others reluctance to embrace any generalized idea when there has been more than a few cases where the government kept a program, hell, military base not because it was essential, but because of the influence/power such a those invested in the program or military installation held.
We probably all agree that we should not be subsidizing the Walton family by paying for SNAP benefits of their (Walmart’s) low paid employees; but, we probably could have a very healthy debate on whether minimum wage should be the role of local and state government or a federal mandate. Either way, you probably would want your representative to care that you think the Walton’s taxes should at least equal the cost it burdens taxpayers providing their employees SNAP benefits.
Regardless of whether you’re a conservative or progressive, we must, absolutely must get money out of politics if we the people are going to have any voice in such a debate. Having a voice is at the core of freedom and liberty and we must not get sidetracked by other issues no matter how passionate we hold the ideal. The legal corruption of our system is allowing our discord to grow unabated and for the sake of our country we must stand united against such a plutocracy.