This is just partisan nonsense, and its only intention is to keep the division between people alive. Leaning right in ones politics does not demand
that those politics favor "the rich" over the poor. Conversely, leaning left in ones politics does not demand that those politics favor "the
poor", and frankly it is hard to see where much of left wing politics does anything for the poor but ensure they stay poor.
The left does not hold a monopoly on charity, and in fact, when the left demands that charitable institutions register with the government in order to
be charitable, and demand taxation as a form of "charity" they are not at all advocating charity, but rather big government as a nanny state,
The greatest conceit of the left is evidenced right here in this thread, when it is asserted the left want to "give health care as a right", as if
rights can be given. Rights either exist, or they do not, but they can not be given and can only be enjoyed by those who own them. That is why they
are called rights, because they are done by right, not by privilege or grant.
When someone, whether "left" or "right" advocates "giving health care as a right" they fail to explain who will pay for this "right" and can
only offer up taxation as an answer, but still fail to answer how taxation will, or even can cover the expense of "health care". Further, the whole
discussion of "health care" becomes so diluted that no discussion what-so-ever is placed upon actual health care, and instead is placed upon
insurance schemes as if insurance schemes will some how cover the cost of health.
Poor diets, bad hygiene, and a lack of proper exercise, both mental and physical, demonstrably leads to much of the chronic illnesses that exist today
in modern societies. Environmental factors play heavily into this as well. There is a whole interconnectedness to health that can not in anyway be
given to people, and most people are better off taking responsibility for their own health.
The left often argues that people can't always take responsibility for their own health, but the left is the ones who have heavily advocated big
government. It is big government that incrementally and steadily have so regulated the ability to take responsibility for ones own health, that
increasingly it is becoming difficult to to make personal decisions about ones own health care because of this. If a person wants to drink fresh
whole un-homogenized milk, they can not "legally" do so unless they own their own farm where they keep their own cows to do so. They can not, if
they so choose, purchase un-homogenized milk as an option towards health.
If a person wants to use tryptophan as a supplement to calm their nerves, they cannot legally purchase it. The FDA, at the behest of major
pharmaceutical corporations, have for years been attempting to regulate the vitamin industry, and push out the smaller companies, so that it remains
solely in the hands of major corporations. Which leads to another conceit of the left.
The left claim it is the right who favor corporatism but it is the left wing policies that ensure smaller companies cannot compete with corporations.
Further, corporations are created by government. All corporations exist by charter. A corporation cannot exist without a grant of government
allowing that existence. Charters can be revoked, but are they? Does government ever agree to take away a charter from a corporation? Does the left
even attempt to engage in charter revocation?
I created, a while ago, a thread here
, offering information on how to kill
corporations, and in all honesty, a couple of my left leaning friends did join this thread for discussion, but most left wingers in this site had no
interest at all in this thread. To be fair, few right wingers had much interest in this thread either, but all this proves is that neither the left
nor the right have any real interest in doing away with corporations. If the left was such an enemy to corporations would they advocate so many
policies that favor corporatism?
Neither the left nor the right truly care about individualism anymore, and the smaller company's have no allies from either side. This is the real
problem, that both the hard left, and hard right have allied themselves with each other, mainly in the form of a two party system that has endeavored
to keep power and maintain control at the expense of protecting the rights of the individual.
The left claims they are the party of the "minorities' but they constantly and insistently declare "minorities" to be groups of people, when in
truth, there is no greater minority than that of the individual.
The individual has been consistently and systematically shut out of the current system, and both the left and the right have adopted collectivism as
the only viable model for governance. Government is no longer about the protection of individual rights, it is has adopted policies that favor
"civil rights" that increasingly becomes "collective rights".
The left will, in its most extreme, declare all property theft, and then create boundaries and trespassing laws that are very much an acknowledgment
of property. Thus, when they declare all property theft, what they really mean is that only the elite of which they favor gets to control the use of
To view corporatism as some creation of the right, is as useless as viewing environmentalism as some creation of the left. Individuals ultimately
adopt conservationist ideals, or environmentalist ideals if you prefer, but rarely governments or corporations. Governments and corporations, as a
tool of propaganda, will pay lip service to environmentalism, but then corporations will crunch numbers and decide it is cheaper to pay fines for
polluting than to change their business paradigms, and governments being every bit as greedy as corporations, will accept these fines as an
appropriate measure, rather than revoke the charters from those corporations that egregiously pollute.
This is the alliance between the left and the right, and the biggest tool of propaganda they rely upon are the degrees in which they regulate
corporations. Thus, the left declares themselves more concerned for people because they favor more regulation, and the right declares themselves more
for freedom because they favor less regulation, but both clearly favor regulation over simply revoking corporate charters that egregiously abrogate
and derogate the rights of others through malfeasance.
Neither side cares a whit about freedom, nor protection of individual rights. Both sides have willingly, and more and more, openly declared war on
the individual, and most certainly the notion of the sovereign individual. Regulation is the mantra of both sides, and it is the regulation of life
itself that they advocate. Whether it be more or less regulation, it is regulation that of the individual that they advocate.
Revoking a corporate charter is not regulation, it is the deprivation of privilege that has been granted by the state. When the state views itself as
existing by grant of the people, and exists to act on behalf of the people, then we come closer to a state that exists to protect the rights of the
individual. When a state, or more accurately those who are employed by the state, view themselves as rulers of the people, then the state comes
closer to protecting the privileges they have created for the elite few they have chosen to enjoy those privileges, and all other individuals exist to
support that system. This is neither a right wing conspiracy, nor a left wing conspiracy, but rather a conspiracy of tyrants who have agreed to take
different sides while pretending to oppose each other, in order to usurp the power that inherently belongs to the people, spread out equally, and not
at all concentrated.
The more concentrated the power base, the more assured tyranny will prevail, regardless of whether that concentration resides with the left, or the