Humans have the fundamental desire to search for hope and change. We always hope for a better life, a few more dollars, and a little more time. We hope our children’s lives will be a change for the better in comparison to our own. We pray that even in death our lives will continue on, but hope that our bodies and surroundings are a change from what we experience in the mortal world. We always hope for a change for the better.
People realize that humanity is a flawed animal. To achieve better lives, unfortunately, we are willing to do things at the expense of others. When we reach prosperity we feel guilty for the ones we bypassed on the way up. Our hope allowed for a change in our lives that others were unable to attain. So, burdened by our guilt, sometimes, we give to charities and organizations in the hopes that our guilt will somehow be lessened. But not all people agree that this is the way to give back, or that giving back is even necessary. Disagreements arise, and a degree of hysteria is born. “How dare those others blessed with exceptional circumstances reject giving back to the poor,” some may say. “How dare they not recognize, and try to somehow ease, their guilty consciences.”
The guilt and desire to ensure that everyone participates in creating a utopian system where nobody can possibly be left behind serves as a unifying concept. These groups demand that retribution be paid, that somehow their guilt be eased by government intervention. The law, at that point, ceases to apply. The intentions of doing what is good outweighs doing what is right. Well intentioned legislation, no matter how damaging to freedom and economies they may be, are enacted. The liberal-minded, at this point, hope for change that will enable everyone to be taken care of by the governmental body, no matter how many liberties they must forfeit.
Read the rest at American Daily Review. . .
No comments:
Post a Comment