What is it?
It seems, over all, we are baffled. We really don't know what to think!!!
For instance, I think politics is about tough love. Not enabling weakness and dependency.
Others think politics is to assist those who are downtrodden.
But going back into the history of social science, the early patriots and founders pretty much just wanted to be left alone by England and be able to defend the country against those who would rob them of their rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Perhaps we need to revisit John Locke and others who influenced the founders and those they influenced. Especially since this is not taught at the high school or university level anymore, at all.
I know, I know
Y A w n ...
"Locke uses the word property in both broad and narrow senses. In a broad sense, it covers a wide range of human interests and aspirations; more narrowly, it refers to material goods. He argues that property is a natural right and it is derived from labour.
In Chapter V of his Second Treatise, Locke argues that the individual ownership of goods and property is justified by the labour exerted to produce those goods or utilise property to produce goods beneficial to human society.
Locke stated his belief, in his Second Treatise, that nature on its own provides little of value to society, implying that the labour expended in the creation of goods gives them their value. This position can be seen as a labour theory of value.
From this premise, Locke developed a labour theory of property, namely that ownership of property is created by the application of labour. In addition, he believed that property precedes government and government cannot "dispose of the estates of the subjects arbitrarily." Karl Marx later critiqued Locke's theory of property in his own social theory."
Locke's political theory was founded on social contract theory. Unlike Thomas Hobbes, Locke believed that human nature is characterised by reason and tolerance. Like Hobbes, Locke believed that human nature allowed people to be selfish. This is apparent with the introduction of currency. In a natural state all people were equal and independent, and everyone had a natural right to defend his "Life, health, Liberty, or Possessions". Most scholars trace the phrase "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," in the American Declaration of Independence, to Locke's theory of rights, though other origins have been suggested.
Like Hobbes, Locke assumed that the sole right to defend in the state of nature was not enough, so people established a civil society to resolve conflicts in a civil way with help from government in a state of society. However, Locke never refers to Hobbes by name and may instead have been responding to other writers of the day. Locke also advocated governmental separation of powers and believed that revolution is not only a right but an obligation in some circumstances. These ideas would come to have profound influence on the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States.
How does your wikipedia article relate to "tough love" of "politics"? Government, if that's what you're referring to, in my mind is a social contract wherein people decide on what services are not covered by other sources and need to be covered for the sake of society as a whole as they agree upon- things that cannot be measured as "property" - rights need to be protected when it's not profitable to protect them - actions that should be taken when the private sector can't or won't see the need because there is no profit in it. It is we the people in real time deciding on what services government can pick up that the rest of society can't - what rights needs to be protected that self-interest is always resistant to protect. It's the roads that are not profitable to be built, the fire department, police department and on and on. There is nothing "tough love" about it. "Tough love" is simply a code word for "welfare" and for abuses of government that people PERCEIVE there are. Everyone understands the code. "Tough love" refers to a strict father approach to making decisions in government as linguist George Lakoff of Berkeley's Cognitive Science department defines. The opposite is the "nurturing mother", not the enabling mother,but the "nurturing mother" who recognizes that there are situations that befall people that are not of their own doing - needs that one group can't perceive simply because they haven't been exposed to the conditions that create those needs. There should be nothing "tough love" about government. There should be actions taken by reasonable people when they see the need, and trust of each other to listen to the groups that know those needs and the rationale for acting upon them. It's all about working together for the common good to create a just society. It's simply that.
"How does your wikipedia article relate to 'tough love of "politics"?"
I said we are baffled and we do not know what to base our political opinions on. I would say conservatives basically want independence for the individual which requires a certain amount of tough love and liberals want "nurturing" for the downtrodden.
But, if we look to what is behind the constitution maybe we can discover a bigger picture, something we can all, or at least the majority, agree on … something which makes sense to all ... or most.
even in families its a question: when to give help when to withhold for the benefit of the child …
Maybe its a question in mass consciousness.
What ideology guides our decisions and provides balance?
No. Government is not meant to be a parent. It is not the government's role to either "nurture" or offer "tough love."
There is a different role for government.
It is to establish justice for the people and generations to come.
It is to protect the land they live in.
Maybe we need know what JUSTICE is based on.
"The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlarge freedom. For in all the states of created beings capable of law, where there is no law, there is no freedom." John Locke
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/autho … locke.html
"Marx saw behind capitalism's law and order appearance a struggle of two main classes: the capitalists, who own the productive resources, and the workers or proletariat, who must work in order to survive. "Marxism" is essentially Marx's analysis of the complex and developing relations between these two classes."
https://www.nyu.edu/projects/ollman/doc … arxism.php
"in economics, capital goods, real capital, or capital assets are already-produced durable goods or any non-financial asset that is used in production of goods or services.
Adam Smith defines capital as "That part of a man's stock which he expects to afford him revenue". Capital is derived from the Latin word "caput" meaning head, as in "head of cattle". The term "stock" is derived from the Old English word for stump or tree trunk. It has been used to refer to all the moveable property of a farm since at least 1510. In Middle Ages France contracted leases and loans bearing interest specified payment in heads of cattle."
"9. The Limits of Political Obligation
While Hobbes insists that we should regard our governments as having absolute authority, he reserves to subjects the liberty of disobeying some of their government's commands. He argues that subjects retain a right of self-defense against the sovereign power, giving them the right to disobey or resist when their lives are in danger. He also gives them seemingly broad resistance rights in cases in which their families or even their honor are at stake. These exceptions have understandably intrigued those who study Hobbes. His ascription of apparently inalienable rights—what he calls the “true liberties of subjects”—seems incompatible with his defense of absolute sovereignty." Thomas Hobbs
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbe … #MajPolWri
Justice is based on what one owns and wants to keep. To protect it from being taken away.
Justice is what The Constitution of the United States of America provides.
The people want their own sovereignty:
sovereignty: jurisdiction, rule, supremacy, dominion, power, ascendancy, suzerainty, hegemony, domination, authority, control, influence.
2 autonomy, independence, self-government, self-rule, home rule, self-determination, freedom.
"Every man has a property in his own person.This nobody has a right to, but himself." John Locke
"Where there is no property there is no injustice." John Locke
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/autho … locke.html
Both Democrats and Republicans want to keep and protect what they own
and prevent it from being taken by others
~~~> including The Government itself.
They also want to protect the land.
We are actually on the same page.
The government needs to not shut down what creates a percolating economy. (Government over-regulation of business.)
The government needs to not confiscate our money / wealth through over-taxation and mismanaging. (Such as giving it away to other countries. We gave Iran eleven billion dollars of taxpayer money to prevent them from building a bomb. We gave away 22% of our uranium rights to Russia thanks to Hillary. )
The government needs to not foster the destruction of American culture, traditions and freedom of religion.
The government needs to not take away potential for individual independence through dumbing down the youth through tyrannical and nonsensical educational programs. (Common Core. Check it out)
Kathryn , You have just GOT to stop making so much sense here , of course when you do the left will step in an introduce the next social - economic program to do just the opposite , I wish those on the left would -could understand the relationship between the strengths of sovereignty and positive economic growth.
Then we could change not only America but the world.
For Instance, Billie K wrote:
"Tough love" refers to a strict father approach to making decisions in government as linguist George Lakoff of Berkeley's Cognitive Science department defines.
The opposite is the "nurturing mother, not the enabling mother, but the "nurturing mother" who recognizes that there are situations that befall people that are not of their own doing - needs that one group can't perceive simply because they haven't been exposed to the conditions that create those needs.
Uh... yes they have!
There should be nothing "tough love" about government.
There should be actions taken by reasonable people when they see the need, and trust of each other to listen to the groups that know those needs and the rationale for acting upon them.
It's all about working together for the common good ! to create a just society. It's simply that.
Can anyone please explain why Billie's understanding of a "just society" is "simply" misguided?
(I can, but someone else could PLEASE take a turn!!!)
This very appealing rhetoric will HAND OVER the country to Hillary and the globalists ... under the direction of the aliens from the golden moon of Neptune, of course. These aliens want this world too. Their golden moon was pretty much uninhabitable. This planet, however, is quite habitable; not only that ... exquisitely beautiful!!!! Although they have been plotting since they arrived in the 1700's, they know, when they finally achieve world domination, it will be well worth their time and effort. Nevertheless, they are probably laughing their alien buns off at how quickly and easily this nation has accepted the Obama Care Health Insurance plan!!!!
by PhoenixV5 months ago
It seems that the more left wing, liberal or progressive the country gets its becoming a divisive country that resembles a cesspool of character.
by Regan Clem5 years ago
Our rights do not come from the Constitution; even our founders knew that. The founders derived their belief in rights from a belief in a Creator. Our rights are given to us by the Creator, they are given to...
by My Esoteric13 months ago
If you were King for a day, what elements of of the U.S. Constitution amd its Amendments would you want to see deleted, repealed, added, or mofified to make it fit more to the way the SIGNERS of the Constitution...
by Michael Collins3 years ago
Do we (Americans) have freedom of speech? If so should Joan Rivers’s apologies for what she said? Can we learn from this and other people who say what they think without considering the consequences while you have...
by girly_girl097 years ago
Back in the 60's:"And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." -President John F. KennedyToday:"What is the President trying to tell...
by Sophia Angelique3 years ago
Here are some quotes from the article below:"“America is in danger, I think, of becoming something of a legal backwater,” Justice Michael Kirby of the High Court of Australia said in a 2001 interview....
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.