Underlying the sturm und drang of this issue are the philosophical assumptions of the two major antagonists in our society: the collectivists and the individualists, and the divide has seldom been more pronounced and divisive.
The collectivist position is currently represented by the extreme left wing of the Democratic party as espoused by the current occupant of the presidency who considers himself an heir to the New Deal legacy of Franklin Roosevelt. In Roosevelt's State of the Union Address of 11 January 1944 he proposed the following "Economic Bill of Rights":
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation;Each and every one of the above "rights" envisions the seizure of private property in the form of labor, capital or property from individual citizens of our nation in violation of the black letter of the founding documents dully ratified by the people of the United States.
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
Opposing the collectivists in this epic struggle are the so called individualists who advocate:
A free market economy – an economy unhampered by political regulations, rigid controls, bureaucratic guidelines, high taxes, mandatory racial quotas, compulsory minimum wage rates, redistribution programs, and other coercive distortions – presupposes the principles of self-ownership and private property rights in peaceful adult citizens. The Left attacks freedom and civilization at this crucial foundation level by denouncing and undermining private property rights at every opportunity, from the income tax and antitrust laws to the Supreme Court’s infamous Kelo decision..
And since the related principles of Self-Ownership and Private Property are the bedrock core of the political perspective known as libertarianism, the Left’s ultimate target is individual liberty and it assiduously fights any significant movement in the direction toward true libertarianism. Libertarianism is the ultimate ideological opposite to Leftism and the Left’s anti-property, anti-individualist Orwellian agenda.
The Left often postures as being in favor of "tolerance" – but only in such superficial matters as skin color, not in the realm of ideas. The Left’s long-time and continuing ideological monopoly in America’s universities seethes with anti-conservative and anti-libertarian bigotry and intolerance much uglier and much more unrelenting than the personal prejudice of any stereotyped Southern racist.
Leftists also claim they are for freedom – but it is not the freedom from coercive interference with peaceful adults for which libertarians stand. No. The leftists clamor for freedom from want, freedom from deprivation, freedom from poverty, freedom from being disadvantaged, freedom from discrimination, freedom from having one’s feelings hurt, freedom from the real world, and other such bogus "freedoms" which, if they can be achieved at all, come only at the forced expense of productive peaceful adult citizens. They think people have a "right" to "free" medical care, food, schooling, retirement funding, disability assistance, housing subsidies, etc. – all to be paid for by the forced expropriation of other people. In other words, they believe that some people have a "right" to violate the rights of others.
In view of the fundamental divergencies in the stated philosophies of the two groups on the "super committee" this writer feels safe in predicting that a further attempt will be made at "kicking the can further down the road" which will be the case even should the minimum requirements of the committee be realized.
