May 10, 2012
While the European socialist experiment is crashing and burning, this administration seeks to double down on emulating the continent that so many of our forefathers suffered greatly to leave behind.
There is no better illustration of their commitment to cradle-to-grave statism than the campaign slide show, The Life of Julia, on the Obama Biden campaign web site. It is simply stunning how far the Democratic Party has come from the classic words of John Kennedy, “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.”
At each state of the fictional woman’s life she is saved or aided by a government program or regulation. He child is saved by Head Start, but there is no mention of a husband or a father. Her career is aided by government loans, her business by the SBA, not by her own sacrifice, frugality, or creativity. At no point in this propaganda is the economic growth or private productivity or wealth generation mentioned that must be tapped to pay for this endless array of soul stunting programs.
The Victorian era worshipped women rather than respect them. Women were to be protected, but not treated as equal citizens. The progress of women’s rights was a rejection of this protectionism to become ‘their own agents’ (a term used by John Tomasi in Free Market Fairness.)
At a time when half of the accountants, lawyers, and doctors are women and more and more women are rising to prominence as business owners and executives and political leaders, it seems incredibly demeaning to insinuate that unlike men, women must rely on government programs to succeed.
It just seems obvious to counter that government served women best by freeing them of the restraints of Victorian patronization, allowing them to utilize their own natural abilities, equal to any man’s.
To insist that the Victorian patronage must be replaced by a government patronage is to deny the true victories of the women’s movement. That The Life of Julia is seen as a serious political position is a strong statement of how wide the divide in American political philosophy has become.