Farmer on Fire in Chicago

By on March 6, 2013 in

The problem with the “golden rule” to “do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” is that some people only do as they were done to and others don’t do at all. Still others are so self-centered that they can’t identify with other people. One suspects that Mrs. Prizker is one of the latter. Also, she seems to have difficulty with language, confusing “entitlement” with privilege. Privilege, of course, has to be deserved and, on that basis, is liable to being withheld.

Does the use of euphemisms produce muddled thinking or are euphemisms the result? I wonder at what point it is going to register with the clueless Cons that “workforce” is not a euphemism and that coerced labor is inconsistent with liberty.

Watch Matt Farmer make the case for a liberal education.

About hannah

View all posts by hannah →
  • BobRobertson

    “The problem with the “golden rule” to “do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” is that some people only do as they were done to and others don’t do at all.”

    So, Hannah, what is your criteria for making someone do what you want them to do when they would otherwise not do it?

    Do you have an objective judgement at which point might becomes right?

    • hannah

      No, when I want something done, I do it myself. I do not cajole or coerce. If suggestions and gentle persuasion are ineffective, so be it.

      • BobRobertson

        Well, your original statement of “and others don’t do at all”, is how I thought you were saying that since some “don’t do at all”, then it’s ok to reject the Golden Rule and do unto them.

        Since you say this is not true, then I am left wondering why you would say that there is any “problem” with the Golden Rule in the first place.

        Can you be more specific? I am fascinated by people’s reasonings for using coercion. For some it’s religion, others it’s nationality, or to impose their idea of “fair” on others. I am still trying to find out just what it is to which you’re objecting in terms of the Golden Rule.

        • hannah

          The Golden Rule is an injunction with which some people are incapable of complying. Having it as a rule misleads people into thinking that they can comply.
          The rule is based on the assumption that people will imitate behavior and act as they are acted upon. The assumption is mistaken because some people can’t imitate and some people don’t act.
          Rules aren’t much good when there are many exceptions. Never mind that if people are free, then they are not to be ruled.
          Which is why our agents of government are selected to serve and the Constitution specifies what they are to do.
          I owe the phrase “agents of government” to Justice Kennedy, an admitted con. Where I probably differ with Kennedy is in his definition of agency. He’s still in “in loco partentis” mode, while I consider an agent to be a steward or well qualified servant.