The hypocrisy of Republicans and Democrats

by REUTERS

Opinions Sep. 02, 2012 - 05:06AM JST ( 17 )

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Author Infomation

REUTERS

Order by Time Order by Popularity

17 Comments

2

VirtuosoSep. 02, 2012 - 11:23AM JST

Attacking both parties is a good starting point. I think "incompetence" would work just as well as "hypocrisy." The economy has become far too complicated to entrust to today's dumbed-down politicians, who are incapable of understanding it. Bringing in Wall St. bankers to run the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department can hardly be expected to help matters.
-2

Thomas AndersonSep. 02, 2012 - 11:28AM JST

Abolish the two-party system. In the next election, vote for neither Democrat nor Republican.
-2

Thomas AndersonSep. 02, 2012 - 11:40AM JST

The "paradoxes" of the Democrats and Republicans aren't so paradoxical once you view it from a further distance. Republicans/conservatives want to "keep things as it is", while Democrats/liberals want to "defend human rights/dignity".

Why are Republicans against gay marriage? Because they don't want to change in any way or shape or form.

Why are Democrats against big businesses? Because they can exploit the people.

etc, etc. In short, Republicans worship the "big guys", while Democrats worship the "little guys".

Now I think that libertarians are truly paradoxical, because I don't really know what they actually want. Libertarians are neither against radical change nor are they really against exploitation of people. What do they actually want? No one knows...
0

Thomas AndersonSep. 02, 2012 - 11:54AM JST

The pure free-market, laissez-faire solution has been a total disaster... but I'm not too worried, because I'm sure that capitalism will be replaced pretty soon. And no, it's not socialism or communism... but something that is better is already emerging. And that is called: "reputation-based economy", or "collaborative consumption". Like the Internet, that new system has emerged spontaneously through complex collaborations among people and hence it's truly self-regulating and self-sustaining. Capitalism has long ignored the role of people but this new system will put people back into the driver's seat.

You don't need a complex or a simplistic model to explain it or predict it because you CAN'T predict human collaboration. Can anyone actually predict the Internet and where it'll takes us in 10 years? No, it's impossible. But we are sure that something amazing is happening when people collaborate with each other and constantly create and come up with new things on the Internet. Human behavior is not something that can be explained rationally because we are NOT rational creatures. We are not mere rational, "economic men", as the economists would put us...
1

Herve Nmn L'EisaSep. 02, 2012 - 12:31PM JST

The title is the most accurate part of the commentary. I think it's fair to call the main party platforms as hypocritical, but that doesn't really go far enough.

The official Republican claim of desiring small government is false as the size of government has consistently grown under them, including regulations.

The Democrats are equally hypocritical in that though the official platform seeks to expand civil liberty, under them, regulations have also expanded resulting in increased infringement of liberty.

Since at least the sixties BOTH parties have led the nation down the path to overregulation, dependency, and the future economic default.

All this was done with the help of voters seeking their own benefit at the expense of others.

The Libertarian movement, however has sought to correct the situation. Sadly, most of those over 30 are so entrenched in the propaganda of the two parties that they cannot or will not examine the Libertarian platform. It's amazing that the youth have become so interested in what Ron Paul has been so consistently promoting for over 30 years.

Indeed, the youth are the future.
3

paulinusaSep. 02, 2012 - 01:49PM JST

"But they [Democrats] deny the right of government to regulate, or even try to influence, private behavior, even when it impinges on community life in such areas, for example, as marriage, child-rearing or trade union activity, especially in the public sector."

Uhh, that's a bad thing?
2

paulinusaSep. 02, 2012 - 01:53PM JST

"...President Obama has failed to justify or even explain his economic policies, while the Republicans have no coherent alternative,..."

So which is better, a good policy that hasn't been explained properly, or just a bad incoherent policy?
-3

edbardoeSep. 02, 2012 - 03:59PM JST

The fiscal crisis of 2008 was caused by the active failure of government regulators to restrict, or even encourage the behaviors that look so foolish in hindsight. The idea that a "return" to regulation, which actually never ended, will prevent future finacial panics is a fantasy of those in love with the "order" brought by strong government. Stalin comes to mind.
-2

gaijinfoSep. 02, 2012 - 06:41PM JST

This seemingly independent piece has many fatal flaws besides the many incorrect assumptions alluded to in the article.

The general argument from leftists masquerading as centrists is this:

The political right is wrong and evil. The left simply doesn't do a good enough job explaining their position.

Capitalism has been around since the days of Krosus. It's only various forms of government intervention that has allowed it to work to varying degrees.

Strangely enough, this article fails to mention the FED, one of the biggest destroyers of wealth, capitalism and freedom that ever existed.

There is no "evolution" of capitalism.

There is an "evolution" of government involvement in any economy. It starts small, and the parasitic cancer called government grows and grows until it kills the host.

It's happened countless times in the history of the world, and it's happening again, on a grand scale.

You can wax poetic all you like about the intricate differences between repubs and dems.

In the end they are both the same:

Stealers of freedom and destroyers of wealth.

Once upon a time, people were wary of any government. Now we've all been conned into thinking we can't live without them.
0

Thomas AndersonSep. 02, 2012 - 07:05PM JST

And there is of course the other side of the extreme... the libertarians. They actually think that they can live without the government even though in reality they are benefiting from the very thing that they detest. Well no wonder that libertarians are in the minority.
0

Thomas AndersonSep. 02, 2012 - 07:14PM JST

These days almost no one believes in the supposed ability of the free-market to stabilize itself via self-regulation. That laissez-faire approach has crashed the economy which caused the Great Depression and it has happened again in 2008 after Thatcher and Reagan revitalized the laissez-faire model again in the 80s with the influence of Milton Friedman. Some people may try to blame the 2008 market crash on the government regulation again, but this time, no one is buying it because it's such a ridiculous suggestion.
1

SamuraiBlueSep. 03, 2012 - 12:30AM JST

The biggest flaw is the author assuming that there is an absolute answer in running a nation. There can only be a moderate mix of the two or at the end there will be no nation to run whichever extreem side you move towards to.
1

Thomas AndersonSep. 04, 2012 - 11:40AM JST

So what is the real libertarian position?
-2

bass4funkSep. 04, 2012 - 03:54PM JST

I think both sides can be polarizing and both sides can be extreme at times. The Republicans did start the wheel and I am particularly talking about from Clinton on down to slowly roll the ball on the financial breakdown and since then from the housing crisis to the wars and the faltering economy, both sides want to shove the blame, but both sides had a hand in all of it through the years. There was a time when you get easily get both parties in a room and talk to try to find the best solution to fix the problems, however that time has come and gone, both sides hate each other to the core, this election will be the nastiest election ever. I am more of a leaning conservative, but I am not a kool-aid drinker and I don't have the biggest trust for ANY politician 100%, I just feel with the current administration, they had their chance and we need to move forward and try something new, is that person Romney, I hope so, but I am skeptical of ALL of them, until I can see something concrete. But my biggest problem with most liberals, especially nowadays as well as many here on JT, they just don't want to hold the current admin. to any standard or responsibility, they can harp all day about Bush, but Obama is totally absolved of ANY wrongdoing, this is where the arguments start to come in. I would have more respect for liberals, if they would just own up and say, yes, we have made mistakes and our President is not perfect and has led us down the wrong path. But liberals get all bent out of shape, I have no problem admitting conservative and the GOP downfall, why can't liberals do the same.

@Thomas, Sam, Herve and the rest, you guys are level-headed usually and bring good points to the table and are NOT kool-aid drinkers, can't argue with you down the middle points, I totally agree.I know to some here, I seem like a Hardcore, but I'm not, I just don't want liberals to make our current President seem like he is infallible and and The Messiah and that he is perfect over all else and that he is not responsible for the last 4 years. That kind of spin, makes me batty. I would do the same, if there were over the top Limbaugh conservatives foaming at the mouth as well, I can't stand them either. 911 truthers or Obama birthers are completely deranged lunatics on both sides of the political fence. I wish and hope one day to have a person, rather than a politician lead America and put the people first and put ideology aside, there has to be a person out there. One day, maybe.
0

Herve Nmn L'EisaSep. 07, 2012 - 06:14PM JST

Thomas, if you honestly want to inform yourself about libertarianism, it's easy; read Ron Paul's book Revolution( love highlighted). Or Google it. There are also great websites such as:Future of Freedom Foundation, Lew Rockwell.com, LudwigVonMisesInstitute, and others.
0

Herve Nmn L'EisaSep. 07, 2012 - 06:19PM JST

Bass, well said( mostly). FDR actually got the ball rolling toward the fiscal cliff, and Tricky Dicky gave it a shove downhill.
0

Herve Nmn L'EisaSep. 07, 2012 - 06:20PM JST

But the ball itself was made possible by the FED creation in 1913.