One of the many flaws of the constant blogger is they make the arrogant mistake of thinking that people really care about their opinion... I guess I'm not any different - so here's my two cents on things =P
As far as politics go, I'll admit from the offset that, yes, I am a die-hard liberal. Sorry to all conservative folks who think I might be stupid/deluded, but that's the way I figure things. But I do have my reasonings...
To me, it appears that one of the big differences between right-wing supporters and left-wing supporters is who we believe are the bad guys. I tend to find that the more edu-ma-cated right wing folks tend to support the right wing as it allows more economic freedoms - i.e. the government is staying pretty much uninvolved in your life, or at least as much as it can be. (Thus, the American ideal; a government that is there to stop the chaos, but not to interfere with your life or your business, and doesn't take much in the way of taxes...). However, I don't believe that governments are The Big Bad Guys. I don't believe that the UK government is going to turn into the world of 1984, or the world of V for Vendetta. Why do I believe this? Because I think that politicians have some form of moral integrity? Nah, not a chance in hell - most of them are professional liars, that's their job, that's what they do - expecting anything different is just gonna set you up for disappointment. But I don't think they're the big bad guys purely because they don't have the capacity to be. The majority (with a few exceptions) of politicians aren't evil, just simply incompetant or selfish. Or, at worst, pretty corrupt and fighting for hidden intentions; usually these tend to revolve around bribes and money - a pretty good example of this is the whole healthcare thing in America. How many politicians do you think are sponsored by drug companies, or other big medical industries that'd lose money if the healthcare reform went through? I remember having the figures somewhere, it's pretty ridiculously high.
To rip off a joke from Robin Williams, politicians should have NAS-Car style jackets, with the names of everyone sponsoring them on the side.. then maybe we'd have some idea of their actual motivations.
But who is one man to fight a massive pharmaceutical giant? Or fight a global oil company? No... it's not the politicians that are the real bad guys - they get a lot of shtick for their actions, but they're just scapegotes taking responsibility for the bad that a large corporation is doing.
Maybe that's a bit of an extreme statement to say from the offset, but it sort-of seems to add up after a while. I mean, the whole Iraq War has been said, at turns, to have been all about oil in reality - and there's a few problems with that simple belief. America and Britain have spent billions upon billions of dollars on this war, and the amount of oil that they, as governments and countries have gotten out of this, isn't really going to make up for all that. But whenever there is war, there's someone profiteering from it - say, as an example, Texaco. The amount of money that they, the company, has made from this all is substantial. Or Halliburton, who got a lot of the contracts to rebuild destroyed oil rigs - these companies got royally paid off, without having to really spend a lot of their personal money. The money of the governments was wasted on war, whilst companies found a way to get a lot of it back into their own pockets.
All very conspiracy theory, eh?
Well, if that one doesn't convince you, how about any of the business going on in the Democratic Republic of Congo? Or Sierra Leone? The DRC managed to get themselves a communist government (which isn't the greatest of ideas either, but whatever), which nationalised all the oil rigs, diamond mines, and other natural resources. They wanted to keep all the money for their own government (and, in theory, allow it to trickle down to the people - it probably wouldn't have gotten that far, but that's corruption for you). It's not really much of a coincidence that, very shortly after this, a large amount of mercenary and/or rebel groups suddenly got armed with western weapons, and encouraged to re-take the country, and allow large companies to start drilling the oil/diamonds again, making some rich guys in an office a million miles away that little bit richer.
Of course, that's a gross over-simplification, but the point essentially still stands; it's rarely governments that are evil in themselves (barring Nazi Germany, and, arguably, the current People's Republic of China), at least in the current western world, but rather the multinational, faceless corporations who stand to make money. Because whilst there's money to be made, the collateral damage in human terms doesn't matter.
So, because of this, I figure that companies such as these should have extremely strict regulation to ensure they don't start pillaging the vulnerable parts of the world for all they're worth. (Ever heard of what Nestle did to half of Africa? Go google it, it's pretty horrible). Do I figure that large companies should be smashed altogether, to make "room for the little guy"? Nah, that's counterproductive - the whole Darwinism of capitalist economics does generally lead to, hopefully, evolution of products and services, and overall progress in the world with technology and availability of things for everyone. However, should they be allowed to wander, unchecked and unregulated, doing whatever the fuck they please? Fuck that shit. I've seen what it's done, both in this country and in other countries, and it's massively fucking damaging. They need to be monitored, and prevented from doing things which are, in the most base and simple terms, pretty fucking evil.
Are the people that work for these companies evil? Nope. They, for the most part, are good guys, just trying to put food on the plate for their family - and that's natural, and there's nothing wrong with that. Looking after your loved ones should always take precedent. And are the over-rich bastards at the heads of these companies evil, when they write a little flick of their signature that signs the death warrants of thousands? Not really.. they're just writing words on paper; it's not real to them, it doesn't matter - what matters is the money, and that matters to ensure the best for your loved ones. Maybe slightly less noble, but it's still understandable. And what about the ground troops? The mercenaries, the murderers all? Are they pure evil, at heart? No. Of course not. They're doing what they have to, and usually aren't in the circumstances to avoid it - it's either become a mercenary and bandit, or get killed and raped by one. Again, the choice is understandable.
Individually, nobody is evil - people are stupid, or selfish, but rarely utterly evil. Just, when people all get together with the common goal of making money, sometimes things go slightly wrong along the way... it's a very sad situation, which is why it needs regulation and monitoring.
Left-wing politics usually tends to be more for the monitoring of these things, and is less inclined to let companies get away with stuff like that. That's why I make my choice towards the left; not because the politicians are great and wonderful, but because they're the lesser of the two evils.
I hope this is acceptable to those who read this; if you want to debate it, feel free to comment. If you're out for a fight, though, I'd rather not stir anything up. This is just my view; I'm not trying to impose it upon anyone else.
"And if, perchance, I have offended, think but this and all is mended; we might as well be ten minutes back in time for all the chance you'll change your mind." - Tim Minchin
As far as politics go, I'll admit from the offset that, yes, I am a die-hard liberal. Sorry to all conservative folks who think I might be stupid/deluded, but that's the way I figure things. But I do have my reasonings...
To me, it appears that one of the big differences between right-wing supporters and left-wing supporters is who we believe are the bad guys. I tend to find that the more edu-ma-cated right wing folks tend to support the right wing as it allows more economic freedoms - i.e. the government is staying pretty much uninvolved in your life, or at least as much as it can be. (Thus, the American ideal; a government that is there to stop the chaos, but not to interfere with your life or your business, and doesn't take much in the way of taxes...). However, I don't believe that governments are The Big Bad Guys. I don't believe that the UK government is going to turn into the world of 1984, or the world of V for Vendetta. Why do I believe this? Because I think that politicians have some form of moral integrity? Nah, not a chance in hell - most of them are professional liars, that's their job, that's what they do - expecting anything different is just gonna set you up for disappointment. But I don't think they're the big bad guys purely because they don't have the capacity to be. The majority (with a few exceptions) of politicians aren't evil, just simply incompetant or selfish. Or, at worst, pretty corrupt and fighting for hidden intentions; usually these tend to revolve around bribes and money - a pretty good example of this is the whole healthcare thing in America. How many politicians do you think are sponsored by drug companies, or other big medical industries that'd lose money if the healthcare reform went through? I remember having the figures somewhere, it's pretty ridiculously high.
To rip off a joke from Robin Williams, politicians should have NAS-Car style jackets, with the names of everyone sponsoring them on the side.. then maybe we'd have some idea of their actual motivations.
But who is one man to fight a massive pharmaceutical giant? Or fight a global oil company? No... it's not the politicians that are the real bad guys - they get a lot of shtick for their actions, but they're just scapegotes taking responsibility for the bad that a large corporation is doing.
Maybe that's a bit of an extreme statement to say from the offset, but it sort-of seems to add up after a while. I mean, the whole Iraq War has been said, at turns, to have been all about oil in reality - and there's a few problems with that simple belief. America and Britain have spent billions upon billions of dollars on this war, and the amount of oil that they, as governments and countries have gotten out of this, isn't really going to make up for all that. But whenever there is war, there's someone profiteering from it - say, as an example, Texaco. The amount of money that they, the company, has made from this all is substantial. Or Halliburton, who got a lot of the contracts to rebuild destroyed oil rigs - these companies got royally paid off, without having to really spend a lot of their personal money. The money of the governments was wasted on war, whilst companies found a way to get a lot of it back into their own pockets.
All very conspiracy theory, eh?
Well, if that one doesn't convince you, how about any of the business going on in the Democratic Republic of Congo? Or Sierra Leone? The DRC managed to get themselves a communist government (which isn't the greatest of ideas either, but whatever), which nationalised all the oil rigs, diamond mines, and other natural resources. They wanted to keep all the money for their own government (and, in theory, allow it to trickle down to the people - it probably wouldn't have gotten that far, but that's corruption for you). It's not really much of a coincidence that, very shortly after this, a large amount of mercenary and/or rebel groups suddenly got armed with western weapons, and encouraged to re-take the country, and allow large companies to start drilling the oil/diamonds again, making some rich guys in an office a million miles away that little bit richer.
Of course, that's a gross over-simplification, but the point essentially still stands; it's rarely governments that are evil in themselves (barring Nazi Germany, and, arguably, the current People's Republic of China), at least in the current western world, but rather the multinational, faceless corporations who stand to make money. Because whilst there's money to be made, the collateral damage in human terms doesn't matter.
So, because of this, I figure that companies such as these should have extremely strict regulation to ensure they don't start pillaging the vulnerable parts of the world for all they're worth. (Ever heard of what Nestle did to half of Africa? Go google it, it's pretty horrible). Do I figure that large companies should be smashed altogether, to make "room for the little guy"? Nah, that's counterproductive - the whole Darwinism of capitalist economics does generally lead to, hopefully, evolution of products and services, and overall progress in the world with technology and availability of things for everyone. However, should they be allowed to wander, unchecked and unregulated, doing whatever the fuck they please? Fuck that shit. I've seen what it's done, both in this country and in other countries, and it's massively fucking damaging. They need to be monitored, and prevented from doing things which are, in the most base and simple terms, pretty fucking evil.
Are the people that work for these companies evil? Nope. They, for the most part, are good guys, just trying to put food on the plate for their family - and that's natural, and there's nothing wrong with that. Looking after your loved ones should always take precedent. And are the over-rich bastards at the heads of these companies evil, when they write a little flick of their signature that signs the death warrants of thousands? Not really.. they're just writing words on paper; it's not real to them, it doesn't matter - what matters is the money, and that matters to ensure the best for your loved ones. Maybe slightly less noble, but it's still understandable. And what about the ground troops? The mercenaries, the murderers all? Are they pure evil, at heart? No. Of course not. They're doing what they have to, and usually aren't in the circumstances to avoid it - it's either become a mercenary and bandit, or get killed and raped by one. Again, the choice is understandable.
Individually, nobody is evil - people are stupid, or selfish, but rarely utterly evil. Just, when people all get together with the common goal of making money, sometimes things go slightly wrong along the way... it's a very sad situation, which is why it needs regulation and monitoring.
Left-wing politics usually tends to be more for the monitoring of these things, and is less inclined to let companies get away with stuff like that. That's why I make my choice towards the left; not because the politicians are great and wonderful, but because they're the lesser of the two evils.
I hope this is acceptable to those who read this; if you want to debate it, feel free to comment. If you're out for a fight, though, I'd rather not stir anything up. This is just my view; I'm not trying to impose it upon anyone else.
"And if, perchance, I have offended, think but this and all is mended; we might as well be ten minutes back in time for all the chance you'll change your mind." - Tim Minchin