Heres a story from Feb 14 - but dont let that put you off - the points it raises are still relevant, and the events it talks about are fascinating given the context of only a few months of rolling policy disaster by the scone heads running the nation (increasingly into the ground). -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Westen, and the likes of liberal neuro-linguist George Lakoff, posited that the way that conservatives viewed money was tied to morality. To very briefly summarise, if a person is rich, it is proof that they are a good and moral person. It demonstrates that they must be hard-workers, wise investors, who are self sufficient and possess personal discipline. The corollary of this is that poor people, who lack money, also lack morality. To a conservative, lack of money proves that you must be lazy, ill-disciplined, self-indulgent, deviant and dependent on others. The role of government is to support morality and punish immorality. Thus, people on welfare are immoral and thus should be penalised, while rich people should be further rewarded and incentivised to continue to be moral. This moral system, in my view, underpins the Abbotts governments approach to corporate welfare, and especially to the environment. In the conservative world-view, companies like Holden and Ford, or SPC-Ardmona are unworthy of government support because they lose money. By definition, because they need government aid, theyre immoral, dependent, ill-disciplined and lazy. Meanwhile, companies like hugely profitable fossil fuel companies and coal miners like Clive Palmer, are good, moral companies. Their enormous profits are proof of their morality.
Posted on: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 06:58:50 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015