When Public Is Better
I just wrote blog about two hours ago on what is Liberal-Democracy on a different site. And last night I wrote a blog about the differences between Liberal-Democrats and Social-Democrats in the. Democratic Party so this might sound repetitive but this is important because it goes to the heart and the division in. The Democratic Party and what Democrats believe is the role of government especially the Federal Government. And it also goes to the differences between individualism in its Liberal form and collectivism.
If you are what I would call a Liberal individualistic, you believe that people when they are educated and know all of the important facts. That they can make the best decisions for themselves, that government can help inform people but the people themselves can make these decisions for themselves. And that you have a competitive market so we all have as many good choices as possible. Thats the Liberal wing of the Democratic Party that Bill Clinton brought back to life in the Democratic Party and to a large extent. Its still the Bill Clinton Democratic Party with Clintonians still in charge, I'm a Clintonian myself. If you are a Collectivist you believe that if people have choice and freedom. They'll either make bad choices, I mean we would automatically make bad choices, one of the issues I have with Progressives is that they. Tend to be pessimistic or we would get taken advantage of by someone in the private sector. Because we are too dumb and get fooled easily because we are only human. But they believe if government is in charge especially the Federal Government, that we wouldn't be able to make bad choices because. Government would make those decisions for ourselves.
If todays Progressives were in charge I don't believe we would have a private healthcare system. Insurance as well as healthcare but we wouldn't have a private retirement system either. Its hard to read the blog from the Roosevelt Institute any day now and not find some editorial about the need for the. Federal Government to create this new program or takeover this part of the economy or another part of the economy. You could probably forget about a private banking system or private schools and so fourth. That all matters that are considered social services would become matters of the state. Public housing, people living there would be living in government run apartment buildings probably in the. Same run down neighborhoods as they are in today, instead of residents of public housing given vouchers to. Help pay for their rent.
What you would get in a Social-Democracy in America which I believe would never happen from the Progressives of today. Is that all matters that are viewed as social services, education, healthcare, health insurance, pension. Childcare, banking and so fourth, things that people have to have to live, perhaps drugs and food would be matters of state. Meaning the Federal Government would either be running these things and in most cases running them. Or be heavily involved in them through taxation and regulation, to prevent people from being taken advantage of or making mistakes with their own money. Or to prevent some people from having it too god compared with others so we are all the same. What Liberals want to do is to empower the individual with all the resources and info that they need to be. Able to make their own decisions and have the opportunity that they need to be successful in life but again. Then its up to them to make the best of those opportunities or not.
This is the divide in the Democratic Party because the Leader of the party is essentially a Clintonian. Except for maybe when it comes to the War on Terror, which is why you have some Democrats who love President Obama. Or like him a lot such as myself and then you have others who think he's essentially a traitor because he isn't as far to the left as they are. And basically see him as a center-right Republican which is ongoing debate I've been involved in myself.