(no subject)

[chess]

I've been finding out lately that a disturbing number of you are conservatives/Tory supporters of some stripe or another. Being somewhat of a flaming red socialist myself, I'm interested in how you guys justify the belief that the rich ought to get richer and the poor ought to fend for themselves that seems to be the Tory standpoint to me...

Comments

Governmental Priorities

[passage.livejournal.com]

Could you justify your values for the function of government? (Your following post doesn't justify, only expound.)

For my part I think that government should be a body that governs, in particular in moderating the interations of humans with one another.

A body that did that, but did nothing to provide the 'minimum standard of living' you seem so keen on would be a government, a group which didn't but did provide that 'minimum standard' would just be a large soup kitchen.

(I am incidently very pleased that our government, and indeed most if not all western governments, do seek to provide for those of their citizens in need, but that's a bonus, not what makes then governments.)

Hypothetical question while we're at it. You have a choice of two ruling groups, one provides food and shelter for the very poor, but randomly imprisons the innocent and releases the guilty according to a justice system based on the judge flipping a coin. The other has strong standards of justice and a sound legal system, but thinks providing for the poor is the responsibility of their families and friends, and so makes no provision for them, which would you put in power?

(Not that I'm putting forward either as particularly good governments, but their failings I think expose the issue).