The Awful Truth
I would define myself politically as pretty squarely in the libertarian camp. Unfortunately, some of my fellow campers are all wild-eyed "the federal government has no power to issue paper money", but on the whole, it's a fine group. The intersection of "liberal" elements and "conservative" elements has on occasion caused confusion among some of my traditional liberal and traditional conservative friends. The other day, a friend and colleague of mine inadvertently gave me a shocking insight as to why I can't align myself with the liberal element.
I do contract work for a collection firm, and every Tuesday and Thursday I process a bunch of civil suits against defendants who haven't paid their creditors (mostly credit card companies). Very few debtors appear to defend the claim, and I proceed to enter judgment against them.
On this particular Thursday, an attorney appeared on behalf of one of the defendants. This attorney works for the local version of Legal Aid, and she came in with the gleam of moral superiority; because I was in court on behalf of an evil, heartless corporate monster, and she was representing a little old lady. I pointed out that the little old lady in question had rung up some $15,000 on her credit card. We went back and forth a bit, when my very liberal friend came out with this astonishing comment: the credit card company was at fault because they should have known that she couldn't afford the purchases she was making. In essence, she was saying that the company should have intervened to prevent this lady from making her own bad choices.
This, to me, is the bottom line problem I have with the interventionist (liberal and conservative) mindset. They do not trust individuals to make their own decisions, and would rather step in to make those decisions "for their own good". The two political parties want to intervene in different aspects of your life, but they both presume to know what is best for you. This strikes me as an incredibly misanthropic worldview, which both sides would no doubt vigorously deny.
I do contract work for a collection firm, and every Tuesday and Thursday I process a bunch of civil suits against defendants who haven't paid their creditors (mostly credit card companies). Very few debtors appear to defend the claim, and I proceed to enter judgment against them.
On this particular Thursday, an attorney appeared on behalf of one of the defendants. This attorney works for the local version of Legal Aid, and she came in with the gleam of moral superiority; because I was in court on behalf of an evil, heartless corporate monster, and she was representing a little old lady. I pointed out that the little old lady in question had rung up some $15,000 on her credit card. We went back and forth a bit, when my very liberal friend came out with this astonishing comment: the credit card company was at fault because they should have known that she couldn't afford the purchases she was making. In essence, she was saying that the company should have intervened to prevent this lady from making her own bad choices.
This, to me, is the bottom line problem I have with the interventionist (liberal and conservative) mindset. They do not trust individuals to make their own decisions, and would rather step in to make those decisions "for their own good". The two political parties want to intervene in different aspects of your life, but they both presume to know what is best for you. This strikes me as an incredibly misanthropic worldview, which both sides would no doubt vigorously deny.
posted by Maureen at
1:55 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home