At the end of my previous post, I asked why someone who hates a country or is somehow ashamed of the flag of that country would want to run for office to become a leader that same country. It seems like either an inexplicable contradiction or some sort of treason. This is the question asked by conservatives of certain liberals. A similar question has been asked about conservatives who, after railing against government interference and claiming that government can do little right, end up serving over the same departments they openly detest. Anticipating that some of my readers may conflate these two issues, I thought I would address the latter in more detail.
The difference is that to be against a country is to be against its people, while to be against a department is simply to wish it was run better. Indeed, sometimes the only way for a department to be run better is to outsource its functions to other departments – or into the private sector.
For example, if someone is an open critic of the EPA, believing it to do more harm than good, why wouldn’t those who agree appoint that person to run it, whether to change it or shut it down completely? It makes sense. On the other hand, one who actually hates society itself and its people, probably shouldn’t be handed the reigns of government. Those who criticize the EPA have a vision of a better American society without it. Those who are ashamed by the very community they belong to can have no better vision for that same community – only for a different one.
It’s not really the same thing.
RSS Feed