3 ms·
I agree with you. However for large swaths of the country's population people would interpret all of the above as "socialism" and they'd complain. In contrast
by jghn 3y ago
I agree with you.
However for large swaths of the country's population people would interpret all of the above as "socialism" and they'd complain. In contrast "defend our people from evil terrorists", either via TSA or military, does not get the same scrutiny.
- mindslight 3y agoSure, that's called culture. It feeds into itself, and is essentially what we're critiquing. The proto-fascist culture where the only uses of government are domination and control shouldn't be encouraged.
- jghn 3y agoAgain, 100% agreed. But for someone wondering "why do we pay these people?", this is the answer.
- mindslight 3y agoYou're trying to make this weird middleground between normative and positive statements. In the positive sense, obviously a whole lot of suckers bought into nonsense about terrorists hiding under their beds. We know this is the unfortunate realpolitik dynamic. We don't need to infer unspoken motivations about jobs programs, because the straightforward narrative of security theater blanket is still carrying the day. In the normative sense, it's nonsensical to treat the broken culture of fear/domination as inevitable. That culture is wrong, regardless of how overwhelming it is.
- toast0 3y agoSure, some of those sound like socialism, but not fixing roads, and I don't think cleaning up transit stations either (but of course, having transit stations could be considered socialism, and making therefore making the stations better could be too). Hell, making roads nice and making nice parks sounds a lot like 'make america great again' to me. But maybe I'm not conservative enough to be the sounding board.
- jghn 3y agoAgain, I 100% agree with this too. And yet I guarantee that it'd be excoriated on Fox News.