My last post was dedicated, more or less, to the notion that the ideas from the left are irrelevant and impotent. I’ve been challenged on that score on the basis that the democrats could win again (and in all probability, will win again).
This misses the wider point of my post. Actually, when I talk of relevancy, I’m talking about a much broader scale than democrats vs. republicans. I’m also talking about a much broader scale in time. Fundamentally, I’m really talking about the notion that man has no moral right to exist, but for the ultimate sake of his service to the needs, whims, and claims of others. In other words, just as in the Jesus metaphor, man, to become his best, must become a sacrificial animal to others and society—just as Jesus was the sacrificial animal to all of mankind.
That’s a moral principal that crosses over the ephemeral, quaint democrat-republican divide, and that’s what I mean by irrelevance. It’s true that the democrats propose most of the social engineering that has as its implicit foundational principal that man’s moral right to life is a license granted, ultimately, by others and "earned" by service to them. But, the republicans propose plenty of that as well.
Events like the grand, world-changing events in history, and most recently, the tragedy in SE Asia illustrate that there is no need to enslave men to the claims and whims of others, even if there existed a right to do so. Human nature is such that the most free; the most productive; the very best will give and give. And they will do so in many ways—often in ways far more profound than writing a donation check or rolling up sleeves (like: creating new markets, jobs, and paychecks, for instance). Freeing men from the guilt and societal chains of forced servitude to the whims of others creates the best sort of men, and the best sort of men always lift society to new heights.
One day we will learn to trust the general goodness in human nature, and virtually all politics will become irrelevant and impotent.