College Students and Ethnic Minorities Have Changed the World

If one follows economic trends then one has watched the real wages and buying power of Americans drop for decades. The idea that young Americans today represent the first generation to have less than their parents is inaccurate. Several American generations have had less buying power than the “Greatest Generation” you mention, or their offspring – the Baby Boomers.

The financial supremacy America briefly had came from circumstances. When World War Two ended and the infrastructures of Europe and Japan were destroyed, America was, buy fortune of geography, intact and booming with it war-making economy running at full-bore. We took advantage of circumstances and rebuilt the world in our image and left it literally in our debt. While this process went on we had tremendous economic advantage. Our political and economic might was preeminent.

But the world rebuilt, and surprise, there are intelligent and industrious people in other countries, and soon they were out-competing us in many areas. Without the nigh monopoly we had on the world economy after WWII, we saw our markets reduced and our relative wealth declining. Instead of working to become more productive, we fought each other in a bitter culture war. One side defined America as a country whose citizens were free to associate and build in an environment as unfettered as possible. The other side saw inequality as the supreme sociopolitical issue, and they sought to reduce freedom with the goal of making a more egalitarian society.

A country both in turmoil and exhibiting luke-warm productivity is not a good investment. And so our money-men and women, our culture of elites, took their huge fortunes and invested them elsewhere. America makes much of its money today by moving around the fortunes amassed when we were lucky enough to find ourselves on the top-of-the-heap. It lives largely in denial of its failings and doggedly assured of it greatness. But it has forgotten the reason it was great, and that is the real tragedy of this election.

You see, long before America was the world’s biggest economy, or had the most warships, or saw itself as the nexus of a uni-polar world power structure, it actually was the greatest nation in the world, and what made it great was freedom. It was a freedom largely born of America’s independence from foreign influences in government and economics. We made nearly everything we used. We protected our economy from foreign kings and merchants, and the influence they would use to make us beholden to their will. Our population boomed. America thrived.

Freedom is not without cost. Freedom lets people fail. It leaves them to find solutions, take risks, and live. It makes the decisions of individuals important and it punishes them for their mistakes and even their weakness. When life has consequences there can be clarity, there can be right from wrong. In such a world people can speak plain truth and euphemisms are reserved for negotiations. The well-lauded modern phrase “I tried my best,” is not an accomplishment in a free society. It is just another way of saying “I didn’t do it.”

Throughout the Western World the European populations are dying out. There are several reasons for this but the first reason is that they are no longer free. With the election of a Cultural Marxist to America’s highest office, this country has made it most historic rejection of freedom. Its first overt step toward death. Today is not a great day, it is the harbinger or turmoil ahead, an assurance of future conflict.

Reply

No generation after the baby boomers has had as much buying power as the Boomers. I don’t think this can be disproven. Neither Generation Y, nor the Google Generation, nor the so called New Silent Generation has had more real spending power than the Boomers. If you dispute this and cannot find the time to produce evidence, let me know and I will produce some to support my argument.

With respect, slavery is not freedom. Despite slavery’s nearly universal popularity throughout most of human history, I would argue that slavery is anti-freedom. It deprives the enslaved of rights that others posses. Although being a slave owner hardy proves that said owner is free. Slaves can be made free. Owners can be made free. But in both cases the rest of life is up to them. That’s freedom. That’s it.

You make a good point with your comment about coal companies, but I am not arguing that Americans can’t come together corporately to make laws to restrict coal companies. I cannot remember any meaningful debate on coal company freedom vs. individual freedom during the presidential campaigns. Nor do I have any sense that either McCain or Obama was more anti-coal company freedom, but I am certain which candidate was more anti-individual freedoms.

Of the two dismal presidential candidates, neither was a great champion of Individual Freedom but only one of the candidates wanted hiring quotas that would give preference to distinct groups for no reason beside their race or gender. Only one candidate favored race and gender preference in public and private life. Only one candidate favored laws that outlawed certain kinds of speech. Only one candidate was sympathetic to “slavery reparations” payoffs. Only one candidate wanted more public money to pay for free housing and freebies. Only one candidate favored a policy he openly described as “the redistribution of wealth.” Only one candidate opposed the second amendment to the constitution. This “one” candidate is Barak Obama.

All of things listed above represent gross restrictions of personal freedom – of freedom. If you voted for Barak you either can’t comprehend individual freedom or you think restricting freedom to handicap some and advantage others is a good thing. When you say things like… Adam says: “I think that in the world you live in, everyone can not be free.” I am confused because you have voted to make people less free, and I have not. After meditating on things for awhile I realize that you are confused.

Equality is not freedom, Adam. Freedom is the antitheses of equality.

When you say… Adam says: “I think that in the world you live in, everyone can not be free.” You are inadvertently saying that: A just worldview must provide the same outcomes for all people. This is a decidedly anti-freedom viewpoint. This is a Marxist viewpoint. If I were to declare the scope of my proposed free-world, it would be no bigger than my own country. It would be a place where people were free to fail and succeed within the natural machinations of social and economic life. It would be a place of diametric relationships – triumph and tragedy, love and hate, meaning and despair. Such a world makes better people and greater nations, and it fits more naturally with the many aspects of human character.

Adam says: “Your freedom is not being taken away from you, unless your freedom is dependent on someone suppression.” Again, this is a statement that confuses equality with freedom. An individual’s freedom is taken away when they cannot get a job because the law says their skin is the wrong color, but their freedom isn’t infringed if someone doesn’t like them because of their skin color.

A noteworthy quote from your post is… Adam says “I believe that there will never be a day when the world is is completely free, because there will always be people who are trying to control. Trying to create the world in their own image or trying to keep it from changing.” Aren’t you one of these anonymous controllers? Aren’t you trying to change the world into the world you think it ought to be? From such a vantage you must see yourself as the enemy, as your candidate seeks more government and more control over individual freedom in order to change the world.

People who seek reduced government, individual freedom and healthy nationhood, do not need evermore legislation to force others into politically correct molds, but equality mongers do. And they need these molds because what they’re about is unnatural and unhealthy, and those that follow the PC path choose decline and finally, death.

Reply