Is It part of the process of freedom?
2007-10-30 08:24:03 · 11 answers · asked by Moody Red 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The personal responsibility to pull yourself up by your bootstraps and not expect the government or anyone else to take responsibility for you.
Everyone has the rights and opportunity in this great nation.
2007-10-30 08:51:09 · update #1
In other words this philosophy emphasizes the impotance of the individual man within a society. It supports the need that all societies and nations must have guaranteed limits placed on their power so that the individual is not lost in society. A constitutional democracy.
2007-10-30 08:55:59 · update #2
This concept is not understood by the left wing Liberal Democrats. They are Socialists and they always know what is better for us than we do. They believe government (and high taxes paid by everyone) should be the key to keeping them in office and you dependent on them. Socialism will quickly strip away all your freedoms. Remember......they will know what you should eat, where you should live, how many children you should have, how to care for these children, what you should wear. It is endless.
2007-10-30 10:47:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
As individuals,we must conduct ourselves within the bounds and limits of the society we wish to be a part of.If we choose to behave in a way that is counter to those rules,we must choose to be a part of society and enjoy its benefits or to leave society and give up those benefits.Problems arise when an individual chooses to leave the society and still expects to benefit from it.
To think that all individuals have the same potential for self improvement is asinine;an individual with a limited I.Q. would be a terrible Physicist,an individual with a high I.Q. would be unfulfilled as an assembly line worker.
Does the opportunities afforded to an individual have a reflection upon their chance for achieving their full potential? Certainly,but does not the responsibility that comes with individualism warrant that those individuals parents make "good" choices in life to provide their children with a reasonable chance?
And it is important to point out that in any society,some individuals will be "left behind" It's life;sometimes it isn't fair.
When ,as a society,we attempt to decide what individuals are destined to become,we have lost the ideal of individualism and have become a "collective",the precursor to socialism or communism.
2007-10-30 17:43:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Individualism in the modern world means teens can make their own decision without their parents knowledge or consent, but still have every expectation that mom and dad will put them through college, or a trade school, perhaps start them up in the family business skipping over all that "pay your dues" hourly wage crap. Then they can move into their own place without having to lower their quality of life in the middle.
Obviously, this is not every case, just all to typical.
2007-10-30 19:52:56 · answer #3 · answered by SteveA8 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Without individualism there IS NO FREEDOM.
Without freedom there is no individualism.
Responsibility should ideally be the only limit on either.
If you wish to have freedom, you must limit you own freedom to the degree that you you don't interfere with the freedoms of others.
Example: If your religion says you are obligated to prevent another form practicing their religion if it is different from yours, then you must limit your freedom to practice your religion to prevent yourself from interfering with the freedom of another.
2007-10-30 20:38:26 · answer #4 · answered by Philip H 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm all for individualism. I'm all for a level playing field as well. The latter part has not happened in our society. Grow up in the projects of a major urban community and you will understand.
You cannot argue with me that someone growing up in the ghetto, attending poor schools and living in a single parent household within a violent and drug ridden community has the same opportunities and expectations as someone growing up in the suburbs in a good family and attending well funded schools. It's just not factual.
2007-10-30 15:56:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes, it is. But one must also remember that they are part of a a society and they cannot live their lives counter to the laws and rules of that society. Whatever else a person does, they must obey the law and pay taxes on their income.
2007-10-30 15:41:38 · answer #6 · answered by slykitty62 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Internal freedom yes, but it cannot interact outside its own boarders. I believe that makes it confined and has no benefit other than those who belong. As a world power it is too late to attempt that kind of status.
2007-10-30 15:33:35 · answer #7 · answered by rance42 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Interesting question. Young people fight for the right to be treated as individuals.
How can they explain their aversion to it politically? I can only presume it is due to the accompaniment of personal responsibility.
2007-10-30 15:30:39 · answer #8 · answered by ? 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
To the left it means they can do what they want and you must let them.
2007-10-30 17:22:12 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's good to see you advocating gay rights.
2007-10-30 15:40:35 · answer #10 · answered by Holy Cow! 7 · 2⤊ 4⤋