Where to Find Liberty, Equality and Justice

Below are definitions of many of the types of  ways to organize a society. I have endeavored to find the simplest, most direct, most comparable definitions based on the dictionary and the first use of the terms by their originators.

Totalitarianism: Rule by a small group or single individual

Democracy: Rule by the entire group

Republic: Representative democracy (a bit of a contradiction?)

Freedom: A coercion-less and restriction-less existence

Human Rights: Universal, egalitarian, lawful standards of treatment for all human beings

Fascism: Social conservatism, marriage of government and business, militarism, nationalism and authoritarianism

(Nazism is a type of Fascism that was defined by it’s creator as what would be called “opposite socialism”: instead of the government and the economy existing to the serve all the people, all the people exist to serve the government and the economy)

Capitalism: Private ownership of things by a small group or single individual

Communism: Public ownership of things by the entire group

Socialism: A transition between ownership of everything by individuals and ownership of everything by the group

Social Democracy: Socialism achieved through democratic processes (in Europe this term is used to refer to ‘Welfare Capitalism’, which is simply a system where the negative aspects of capitalism are balanced out by a social safety net)

Communalism: Local decision-making & autonomy within a federation

*Any and all specifics beyond these definitions are types of democracy, republicanism, socialism, fascism etc.

Give me: Human Rights-based, Communal Social Democracy. This would be a balance of public and private ownership. It would be completely democratic and protect the rights of all individuals including the minority.


The Political Spectrum

I don’t think you can necessarily say right-wing people “are” or left-wing people “are” because individuals vary so much. Maybe what we can talk about is what left-wing and right-wing beliefs and values are. Let’s just take one topic- government.

I think it’s pretty safe to say that right-wingers believe in small government- period.

Now, the left-wing view favors neither big government nor small government. The left-wing belief is in GOOD government. It should be whatever it needs to be in order to serve the people (democracy) and the common good (society) and not the profit motive.

A small government that can’t protect the rights of it’s people is bad. A big government that violates the rights of it’s people is bad. A small government that is top-down with little say from the people is bad. A big government that views its people as resources to be exploited for profit and controlled for power is bad. A big government that has many levels where people get to make their own decisions is good.

Any government that does not represent the people is bad because that is the purpose of government. Any government that is not controlled by the people is not a democracy. Unfortunately, the US has never had a government controlled by all the people. We’ve always had a government controlled by the rich. Today most governments across the globe don’t represent the people so much as they represent multi-national corporations and banks.

You’re brave, you sacrifice but I’m sorry, your not helping.

I’m sorry. While veterans are certainly brave, it makes no sense for any of us to thank them for our freedoms. There is not, nor has there been, a foreign militia threatening our freedoms here in America. What minor statistical danger we may face from foreign terrorism is in fact created by our military interventions, and over 700 military bases, around the globe.

The US is protected from attacks, by all but the most powerful nations, by two vast oceans on either coast. We have friendly neighboring nations to the north and south who have never had any interest in taking away our freedoms. There are many nations across the globe that have freedoms comparable to ours, and they have negligible armed forces.

Perhaps a former slave could thank a civil war veteran (although many blacks and abolitionists had just as much to do with emancipation). Maybe a European could thank a US WWII veteran (although Russia played the biggest part in defeating the Nazis). Maybe a Chinese could thank a WWII veteran of the Pacific theatre.

All other military ventures in American history- certainly all military actions since the end of WW II, had absolutely nothing to do with protecting our freedoms. North Korea was not threatening our shores. Nor was Vietnam. As far as our extinct cold war rival, our soldiers didn’t fight the USSR. More recently, the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan had done nothing to our country. Certainly no terrorists have ever had enough power to take away our freedoms. Besides, terrorism has not been, and cannot be, defeated through military action.

Our freedoms exist, to the extent they do, because of the rights encoded in the Bill of Rights and subsequent amendments to the constitution. Freedom isn’t free; but it doesn’t require killing foreigners. Our freedoms exist because average people, not soldiers, spoke up for those rights, exercised those rights and held any entity who wanted to take away those rights accountable. You could even thank certain lawyers, judges, policemen or politicians on occasion. But to whatever extent we have freedoms in this country; it has nothing to do with our military.

There is no reason for us to have a large standing military. Until 1946, it was always America’s tradition to avoid a large standing army. Many of the Founding Fathers warned against this. When we fought World War II it took only a short time to fill the ranks of a very large military force- from less than a quarter million to almost 14 million. It also took us a very short time to convert our industries to arms manufacturing.

We only have a large standing military now to feed the military-industrial complex. We are dependent on the arms industry to help keep our economy afloat. So this worship of the military is a marketing ploy to manipulate people.

Are there individuals and small groups who would threaten my safety or my life? Sure, lots of them live in the inner cities of our own country. Should the army blow them up and shoot them? No sane American would propose that.

Are there individuals and small groups who would threaten my safety or my life in other countries. Sure, lots of them live in the inner cities of those countries and many of those countries are so poor almost everywhere is the inner city. Should the army blow them up and shoot them? Since it’s our military and economic interference in their countries that make them hate us in the first place- I would have to say no. So even though the army might be safe-guarding my freedom IF I lived on the military bases in that country, they are actually creating the dangers I face when I leave that base.

As far as the army keeping anyone from attacking my freedoms here in the US, it’s pretty obvious that nothing they are doing overseas is protecting my freedoms or making me more free. In fact, it is just creating a world more hostile to a US that sticks it’s nose in where we don’t belong- not to protect any people but to make the world safe for international business and finance to exploit these countries. Of course, international business and finance are exploiting our country to- just not at the point of a gun.

So the military doesn’t protect our freedom, it only contributes to problems that can’t be solved militarily.