Dogma is a bitch

More often than not when someone is wanting to make a new form of control over others materialize, arguments against the move are characterized as "outdated ideology", or some other form of ideology. I think they are confusing ideals with dogma. In this sense they are often classing a set of ideals as unfounded dogma, but using the term ideology.

Ideology in and of itself is not a bad thing. I tend to think in terms of the definition of ideology that suggests it is a system of beliefs. Or the study of ideas guiding beliefs and systems of behavior, etc.

Recent trends in discussion of matters which pick the pocket and dampen the spirit tend to lean toward the dogmatic while specifically eschewing anything that might be classed as ideological. It is really a splitting of hairs which begs the question. One example is the angry assertion that the cause, effect, and degree of global warming have been indisputably proven and that is that. It has been set forth from the realm of dogmatic dictate rather than honest analysis of scientific studies and discoveries which might temper or change the conclusions.

The same can be said of present economic discussion, as well as matters involving war and international charity (foreign aid). Tedious as it is to really grasp the problem, I think one would need to examine the process of our development, dispassionately, in detail, for the last 100 years or more. The trouble is that in the realm of business, commerce and monetary policy the various factions jump the gun in defense of either capitalism or socialism without considering the corrupt aspects which hide behind each of those ideologies.

Those, like myself, who favor somewhat unfettered capitalism, tend to ignore the process (unlike myself) by which self proclaimed capitalists became something other than that through changes in government structure which allowed them to control it, thereby reaping tax dollars. When you go too far in that direction, it is no longer what I would call capitalism because it is not a free market; those who pay you do not have a choice.

Socialism by definition removes the choice of an individual to spend his money as he chooses. It is a controlled market, if a market at all.

Both cases rely on dogmatic pronouncements regarding the better good. That is what makes it such a joke that Republicans call themselves capitalists. Their performance when in power proves that they are not. Democrats rarely class themselves as capitalists with any degree of sincerity. Those whom I have known in business tend to consider themselves realists, so they play those in power in order to gain from governmental policies, contracts, and preferences. As one owner of a large advertising firm once told me when I questioned the socialistic rhetoric of a candidate he was actively (monetarily) supporting, "What they say is irrelevant. You back the winner and he will look out for you. He owes you. It's all about who wins".

Never has it been clearer that dogma is being used to manipulate money behavior and the lives of individuals. The more you pronounce a thing to be true, the more people will believe it, with or without evidence. In the general population, global cooling could easily have been pushed as effectively as global warming. People would find that they could sense it themselves. Weather cycles of any significance span more years than most human lives.

The other side of that coin is that it doesn't do much good to ignore byproducts of what you do. Balance in the discussion is astoundingly absent. Hysteria is dangerously given the stamp of sanity.

All you have to do is consider what is an infringement of the rights of others, an assault, or a deception, use the law to prevent and prosecute such crimes, then back off. Let people be free. That requires that we go back to the idea of protecting the individual in the sense of ensuring the rights of the individual to decide his own fate. We now assume that it is best to let the government decide in the name of the collective.

The trouble is that what is set forth by those in power as for the better good is neither proven nor necessarily true, and rarely born of a real desire to promote the "better good". It is just a way to cloud the greed for power and wealth at the expense of those not in power. That would be most of us; not in power. We sorely need to get back to the idea that government is supposed to act only with permission of citizens, not the other way around.

The massive move toward citizens requiring permission from government for almost everything they do is not a good thing. We are continually required to prove innocence without provocation. All in the name of the better good or the security of society. I feel less secure under such a boot.

Although it may be considered idealistic to define right and wrong and the limits on what can be dictated by those with guns, it is a necessary thing. Either a person has a right to live in peace as he sees fit, not forcing others in any way, or he does not. There are naturally times when one's desires have to be tempered because they'd overlap the territory of another's rights, but a lot of freedom can be had without such line crossing. What has happened is that overreaching ideas of "cost to society" have been stretched as far as the "general welfare" clause of the preamble to the US constitution.

I'm curious how those, who discount criticism as steeped in ideology, class their own ideas and agenda. The thing that bothers me the most is that throughout the present turmoil in which many have lost most of their net worth, there seems to be a staunch refusal to look back to the first dominos that were toppled which may have finally led to this. The string of dominoes has been falling one by one for longer than I have been alive. That is true in monetary matters, international affairs and individual freedom.

What makes it so hard to see in this country is the racial history. The move toward racial equality tends to make it tougher to see the larger trend toward wholesale restriction and removal of rights in general. Most people of all races seem unaware of that, and I find that scary as hell. Racial preference in the way of legalizing second class status has changed. The fires are continually fueled but in reality you don't have to be a white male to be president or the secret rich guy whose dirty work I do. It is unfortunate that such a thing as letting everyone be free has somehow been played in the larger game of subjugating all of us to a point we only read about in sci-fi fiction only a few decades ago.