Loosing Freedom
There are changes taking place in our country that is frightening to me and some of my age group. To others there does not appear to be anything wrong or afoot within our political structure. I cannot say that my observations have been scientific or even orderly. They have been formulated just on observation and a little knowledge of history. Nevertheless, I have personal concerns that our nation is sliding toward a style of Government that the majority fought for over 40 years. Could my fears just be that? Could they be based on shallow observations without regard for probable future results? Please let me know, I am eager to hear from those knowledgeable and from them that are of the knowledge… I am looking at three areas that are the targets of our current government. Those three areas are Family, Health care and Labor. I will open with a comment on health care from a conflict theory. Now this theory or perspective was given to us by Karl Marx and that is my chief concern.
The United States remains the only western industrial democracy that does not view health care as a basic right. Under American capitalism, illness may be exploited for profit, and there is neither a national health care system nor national health care insurance. Conflict theorists emphasize the need for structural reform of health care so that services can be delivered more equitably among different social classes, age groups, and regions of the country. (Strauss, 1987; Tolchin,1990b).
From the above statement there might not seem to be anything amiss with it. However, within the body the (CONFLICT) perspective is formalized and mixed with our western culture. Also, the statement sounds remarkably familiar with a recent push for health care reform by our first lady. In fact, it is a near quote. Moving on to the family I have noticed a shift in the president’s tone on issues concerning the family. When he was campaigning, his remarks were not in support of the family as most think or believe. As of late his dialogue has shifted to a more conservative view of which I do not believe he fully rests. The following illustrates what the CONFLICT perspective supports. It is an almost perfect match with Mr. Clintons earlier positions:
Do we really need the family? A century ago, Friedrich Engels (1884), a colleague of Karl Marx, described the family as the ultimate source of social inequality because of its role in the transfer of power, property, and privilege. More recently, conflict theorist has argued that the American family contributes to societal injustice, denies opportunities to women that are extended to men, and limits freedom in sexual expression and mate selection. (William F Ogburn (Ogburn and Tibbits, 1934))
The above only adds fuel to the fire. I am keeping this short for the readers benefit and I hope with the next bit of information you might be able to see my concern more fully. The recent passage of the NAFTA agreement was not a Clinton project as we are aware, it belonged to George Bush.
However, a friend of mine that is from Romania told me one day during a conversation that he fled his country because of communism just to find it being born here in America. A frightening thought for all of us freedom lovers. However, shortly after the passage the president received a warning from labor, as did the congressmen and senators who agreed. In effect they told those concerned to watch next November. A fight between the working class and government has begun in many ways, and the call of Marx can be heard in the backdrop; “Working people of the world Unite”. So, on we go.
CONFLICT THEORY
The functionalist perspective minimizes change. It emphasizes the persistence of social life and views change as necessary in order to maintain the equilibrium (or balance) of a society. By contrast, conflict theorists contend that social institutions and practices continue because powerful groups can maintain the status quo. Change has crucial significance since it is needed to correct social injustices and inequalities. Karl Marx accepted the evolutionary argument that societies develop along a particular path. However, unlike Comte and Spencer, he did not view each successive stage as an inevitable improvement over the previous one. History, according to Marx, proceeds through a series of stages, each of which has an exploited class of people. Ancient society exploited slaves; the estate system of feudalism exploited serf; modern capitalist society exploits the working class. Ultimately, through a socialist revolution led by the proletariat, human society will move toward the final stage of development: a classless communist society, or “community of free individuals” as Marx described it in DAS KAPITAL (original edition 1867; Bottomore and Rubel, 1956:259).
Our very freedom is under fire. I can remember the late CCC President Kruchev and our late president Eisenhower in a televised address to both nations. The Soviet president swore that the U.S. would be taken without a single shot, that we were too powerful to be captured with force, that the communist would destroy the U.S. be killing its soul starting with the youth, family, introduction of excessive violence, permissive sex, influx of homosexuality, mass illegal drug trafficking, and much more. So, what is this NEW WORLD ORDER. Is it the one mentioned on the back of our currency or is it the name for the silent takeover of America?
Mike Kovach
26 November 1993
The Christian Underground Journal
Views: 12