[...] Cory Booker! Whatever would g...
Did White House threaten Cory Booker for criticizing Obama’s attack ad? « Full Metal Patriot on Obama threatens to withhold Social Security checks despite sufficient funds [UPDATED] Social Security Chief Actuary exposes Obama deception
Thomas Jefferson vs. Spock
Serendipity can be a wonderful thing.
While driving to work on Tuesday morning, I was thinking about STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN. It occurred to me that one of my favorite movies contained a socialist message hidden in plain sight. Toward the end of the movie, after Spock sacrifices himself so that the Enterprise could escape Khan’s detonation of the Genesis Device, he tells Admiral Kirk, “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.” The more I thought about it, that bit of collectivist doctrine really ticked me off because it stands at odds with my political opinions. In a dramatic scene, the phrase makes sense. But as a political philosophy, its logical conclusion is anything but.
I tell you that story because today I stumbled upon a great opinion piece over at BigGovernment.com. Jeff Dunetz penned an article entitled, “Collectivism, the Loss of Individual Power and the Future of America” and in it, he cites that scene from Star Trek as an example of liberalism. Since I already had this on my mind this week, it definitely caught my attention to see it again.
Liberal thought, on the other hand believes that man cannot sort things out by himself. It has within it a deep mistrust of human nature. Because man is ultimately a narcissistic being, government is needed to protect one person from the other, so nobody’s right will be trampled on. Inherently small government becomes big government additional tasks must be completed and that diversity of ideas must by nature become more of a collectivist group think, or as Spock’s dying words in Star Trek II indicate The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.
The rest of Dunetz’s essay is an excellent contrast between liberalism and the nature of conservatism, and how the latter forms the basis for American exceptionalism. Read the whole thing.
P.S. Before any fellow Trekkies get onto me; yes, I fully realize Kirk and Spock discussed “the needs of the many” earlier in the movie.
—
UPDATE: In the interest of making a baseless dig against Spock’s logic, I give you “The Ballad of Bilbo Baggins.” Heh.
Posted by FullMetalPatriot
12th gen. American, Constitutionalist, Harley-riding Texan, gun owner & NRA member, blogger, illustrator, Florida Gator alumnus. #TCOT
12th gen. American, Constitutionalist, Harley-riding Texan, gun owner & NRA member, blogger, illustrator, Florida Gator alumnus. #TCOT
In the Search for Spock this philosophy was turned,"The needs of the one outweighed the needs of the many." (Kirk)
Although not in context, we know individual liberty is more important than the needs of the many. Without protecting the needs of the few, many are endangered.
Found you over at Beers w Demo!
The needs of the one outweighed the needs of the many. Kirk in The Search For Spock.
The basis of your argument should be that FORCED collectivism is against your political beliefs. Spock ELECTED to sacrifice himself for the good of the many. That is not collectivism at all; it is reasoned, individual sacrifice. Spock recognized that by sacrificing himself, he would save the rest of the crew. US history is full of examples of individuals sacrificing their freedom and lives for the benefit of the collective; sometimes we call those men and women patriots or heroes. In most circumstances they elected their fate, for those on their right and left, and those left behind. Jefferson and his peers absolutely did this when he authored and they signed that scrap of paper that put the US on the road to independence.