Doc Thought

Published on American Thinker.

What is the economic system of America? I can imagine the consternation of a well informed student attempting to answer that question for a class. One hundred years ago, he could have answered "capitalism" and been about 99% correct. Today, what we have here is an unholy mixture - a small bit of capitalism, a heaping spoonful of socialism, and a liberal dousing of corporatism. Capitalism is a politico-economic system in which property and specifically the means of any production are privately owned, and men deal with one another as traders - trading value for value. Socialism places property under the (in name) ownership of the entire public, and production and value are distributed (by a few) in an equitable manner "to all" as determined by 'the few.' Corporatism can exist in various forms along with socialism or capitalism, but is generally a deviant form of capitalism in which the government (which is supposed to be protecting the individual rights of t...

On this day of gratitude, celebration, and remembrance, sadly, we see even more clearly than usual, the moral confusion in the American mind. Think how often, on this day, you hear the glorification of sacrifice – over and over lauding the 'sacrifice' of the brave men and women who have served this country. It is clear from the manner in which the many media sources discuss the merit of these men and women, that, to them, it is the supposed sacrifice of the veterans' personal values which makes what they have done so admirable. It is again and again stressed how these service members gave up or disregarded their personal interests or values – IE. sacrificed their personal interests – for the sake of the nation. But is this really what these great men and women have done, or have they rather pursued a true prioritization of values, and is this not the fact that makes them so remarkable? Have they neglected a greater personal value and pursued the lesser personal valu...

The political Right has failed to understand and thus explain the fundamental moral high ground it actually holds. I believe this is due in large part to a misunderstanding of the idea of sacrifice within a Christian or generally religious context. True Christian sacrifice is NOT the trading of everything for nothing, but this is the effectual understanding which has been allowed to stand, unspoken, unchallenged. The 'right' view is to see sacrifice as an INDIVIDUAL choice in pursuit of another human's value based on the conviction that each individual is an end in him or herself (just as we understand God to view each of us). The left's unchallenged, bent view makes sacrifice the submission of each individual's status as an end in him/herself, to the group as a whole. This is exactly as absurd as trying to fornicate your way to chastity. The right has NOT done a good job clarifying this evil ideology, and providing the clear correct alternative for the past 100 ...

We all want people who need health care to get care, just as we all want the hungry fed, etc. In accomplishing this, however, it is immoral to revoke another human's right to the product of his mental and physical effort - his property. It is evil to steal from Bob and give to Jane, and this will always be the case, even if Bob is rich and Jane poor. (This may not have been true in the case of a rich feudal lord or monarch whose wealth came by forcible economic rape of the people, BUT, in American capitalism, wealth is CREATED by the producer of value through mental or physical effort. The value is in the created good or service. Men voluntarily trade monetary markers of value for that CREATED value. Except for those rich who became so and thrive by lobbying (bribing) the government to favor their company/interests with legislation, regulation, or the competition stifling tax code --- except for those evil parasites --- wealth in America is NOT come by through the oppressi...

Wrong headed liberal / collectivist ideology is frighteningly pervasive, often in forms in which it is unlikely the people involved are even aware of their infection. As I was watching the latest professional golf tournament, I counted at least a dozen instances in which the announcers used a phrase with subtle, skewed implications. In reference to several PGA professionals' impressive charity work, the announcers referred to the activity as "giving back." As a paraphrase, they would say, "It really is impressive, Jim, how David Toms has taken the time and made the effort to give back." Or, "you can really see that these guys think that 'giving back' is really important." It is not sufficiently tempting to simply write this off as benign happenstance of word choice. There are too many more obvious, and more longstanding phrases to describe the charity which these pros are performing. They are *giving.* They are NOT giving *back*. Giving...

Watching the US Open is one of the more enjoyable events for the average to above average golfer. In this, the supposedly sternest test of golf, we get to see just how tough (or not) the pros really are as the thick high rough, baked fairways, cement greens, and ridiculous length bombard their golfing fortitude. It's a malicious joy to watch them fold, whine, and complain their way to a satisfying missed cut, and/or an embarrassing 80-something. There is something refreshing about seeing the very best experience golf the way most of us have known it for our entire lives - as a wicked tormenting mistress all too gleeful in crushing our small feeble hopes of golfing success. Well, this is how I had happily envisaged the US Open.... Now, after noting the small heard of official 'ball finders' on every hole, I'm not so sure. On each hole, 90% of the terror of that thick lush awful US Open rough is just blithely swept aside by a small army of USGA officials camped alo...