Will a slum theme park satisfy Liberal guilt ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

2dogs

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
1,865
Location
the city
Wow, what a great idea- this is a fine compliment to the Gun-Free Theme Parks, such as the "killing fields" in Cambodia.

Isn't there a special needs program for liberals yet?


http://sierratimes.com/03/11/17/ar_jackward.htm

Will a slum theme park satisfy Liberal guilt ?
By Jack Ward

It had to happen. Liberal guilt finally caused the creation of a third world slum theme park. Yes on June 3 former president Jimmy Carter, dedicated the slum theme park in Americus, Georgia. Officially the park is called Global Village and Discovery Center.

No longer will guilt driven Liberals be restricted to local slums, now they can take the whole family to the ‘Third World Slum Theme Park’. Just imagine the excitement on the children’s faces. Instead of being forced to ride on state of the art thrill rides and eat cotton candy, the children can experience squalor up close and personal. It is unclear if ‘dumpster diving’ will replace the familiar concession stand, but even without these tasty treats the kids can see shacks made from tin, tarpaper, cardboard and cast-off timber. The difference between these shacks and the ones in your home town is these shacks were build by professionals to exacting standards. Your local shacks were built by the homeless and are actually occupied.


The shacks at the slum park were built strictly for shock value. Forget the low flow eco-toilet; the slum park features the age old privy hole. Forget the visual pollution from electrical and phone lines – they don’t exist. No gas guzzling SUVs, no redwood hot tubs, microwave ovens, or other evils of technology. The elimination of technology and the back to nature aspects of the slum park will thrill any radical environmentalist.


Currently there is so much excitement from the Liberal masses that expansion plans are already underway. The Third World Slum Theme Park now features 13 shacks but there are plans to build 22 more. The question is – will 35 shacks be enough to relieve Liberal guilt?


Rather that focus on poverty, the guilt laden Liberals should focus on getting people out of poverty. As I mentioned in an earlier missive, the UN knows why some countries become poor and stay poor. A report from the U.N. Development Program blames poverty on poor governance. For years the United Nations has skirted the real cause of poverty. It was always convenient and popular to blame the developed nations for the poverty in the developing nations. Likewise if poverty only exists in certain areas of a specific country - the local government policies should be reviewed.


It is almost a certainty that the poor will remain poor under socialism. In a free market, nothing stops the poor from creating a fortune. Therein lies the problem – when people are poor they are dependant. Free people can escape the liberal plantation.


But there is another reason that the undeveloped countries are poor. The radical environmentalists and their favorite project - Sustainable Development - is another major reason that these poor and undeveloped countries remain poor. The mantra of the Sustainable Development is that countries and individuals must restrict themselves only to activities that "meet the needs and aspirations of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs." For those that live in third world squalor this pronouncement means that their chance of escaping these conditions and improving their lifestyle is doubtful.


The poor in teeming slums of these Third World nations have the same desires for prosperity as everyone else but the environmental elitists that want to stifle their development. The poor would like to exchange their mud hut for a modern home, trade their donkey cart in for a car, and have access to electricity, safe water and other basics that the radical environmentalists take for granted.


But these elites argue that if the people in the third world are allowed to escape poverty the Earth Goddess, Gaia, will be damaged. The environmental elitists travel to these third world counties to promote their agenda. They discourage modern agriculture and building methods and encourage the primitive people to be satisfied in their poverty.


Don't fret about those that advocate Sustainable Development, they live in comfort. In their zeal to protect their precious birds, bugs, reptiles, rodents and weeds these radical environmentalists have sentenced the worlds poor to a life of poverty.


What the Left has failed to understand is that freedom and happiness can not be created by destroying individual rights; and prosperity can not be created by evading the laws of economics.

Socialism creates dependence while the free market is the best system for producing wealth and promoting prosperity.


The United States managed to amass unprecedented wealth while third world countries live in poverty. The blame for the poverty can not be assigned to these people, because those that move into free market environment prosper. The reason why the US has been able to amass great wealth is that rule of law is embedded in our values. History shows that where there's rule of law, human initiative and freedom flourishes.


It is obvious that poverty is the lack of wealth. But wealth must be produced and the single best requirement to produce wealth – is freedom. It is not a coincidence that the poorest countries also lack individual freedom. So rather than create a poverty theme park, those on the left should focus on what really causes poverty – Socialism.
 
Good article

The radical environmentalists and their favorite project - Sustainable Development - is another major reason that these poor and undeveloped countries remain poor. - Exactly.
 
Reality Check

This is a nonsense article. The center shows the squalor in which people people actually live throughout the world.

The goal is to engage people in trying to improve it.

The "village" is run by Jimmy Carter's Habitat for Humanity, which funds and builds non-slum housing throughout the country and around the world.

Say what you want about the Carter presidency, but Jimmy Carter is an admirable humanitarian who has done a world of good in the last 25 years.

Habitat for Humanity is a program that anyone here should be able to get behind. It is private, voluntary, requires personal responsibility and committment from its recipients, and makes people's lives better.

It may be true that Western environmentalists want to keep the third world poor in order to save the environment. But I doubt it greatly.

Third world countries tend to adopt high-pollution technology, because it's cheaper to pollute than not, and because these countries tend to have lax rules, if any, about polluting.

Of course it will come around and bite them in the tush eventually. Environmentalists, it seems to me, are more interested in saving them the pain of such a course and steering them toward less-polluting solutions the first time around.

I've never seen evidence of "don't get a tractor -- keep using oxen" pressure from Western environmentalists. If someone has, please post some evidence.

Not all conservatives are right. Not all liberals are wrong. And no one wants to live in a polluted world.


http://www.habitat.org/gvdc/
 
Carter's Choice for Humanity

The best thing that Jimmy Carter could do for humanity is shut up and grow peanuts.Or just shut up,perhaps he can do that well but I have my doubts.
 
Have you ever actually been in a 3rd world country and seen the unbelievable squalor and poverty in which much of their populations live? Most Americans have not. The idea of this place is to give those Americans a hint of what much of the world calls daily life. MPayne already hit the salient points regarding economics and environmentalism in those countries.

Not all conservatives are right. Not all liberals are wrong.
This can't be said often enough.
 
A very wise man once said that if you want to feed someone for a day you should give them a fish, but if you want to feed them for a lifetime you should teach them how to fish.

You can throw all the habitat for humanity you want at a country but if they dont have a a stable govt that protects property rights you're basically transferring wealth to them instead of enabling them to create their own. The lynchpin is their govt, and that must be addressed first and foremost.

Once that is taken care of things like the peace corp and habitat for humanity can be extremely useful, but I don't think promoting socialism while trying to induce American guilt is the way to actually help these people, it might ease one's conscience but how much does that do to feed someone?
 
The best thing that Jimmy Carter could do for humanity is shut up and grow peanuts.Or just shut up,perhaps he can do that well but I have my doubts.

Good kneejerk ad hominem.

Got anything useful or relevant to say?
 
It is almost a certainty that the poor will remain poor under socialism. In a free market, nothing stops the poor from creating a fortune. Therein lies the problem – when people are poor they are dependant. Free people can escape the liberal plantation.

Wrong. It's an absolute certainty that the poor will remain poor under socialism.

...Jimmy Carter is an admirable humanitarian who has done a world of good in the last 25 years.

Wrong. He's a liar, a fool, and a nitwit who weakened America while in office, and has since done his best to make a laughingstock of our nation.
 
Say what you will about Carter and his presidency, but no one can deny the good he has done with Habitat. A privatly funded charity requireing personal responsibility from the people it helps is nothing to gripe about or slander. It is a great organization that requests no help from the .gov and helps out those in need.
 
The problem with "liberal guilt" is that the Mastercard Marxists fail to feel guilty for the correct injustices that THEY have wrought upon the world.

I have a alternative solution: Leftists should send all of their money to me! I am a minority. I am in need. And I will send them a letter releasing them from their guilt.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.