Eric Hague takes a potshot at Randian Objectivism with a parody depicting a "selfish little brat" morally opposed to the redistribution of her hard-earned potty chart stickers:
You see, that Elmo ball was Johanna's reward for consistently using the potty this past week. She wasn't given the ball simply because she'd demonstrated an exceptional need for it—she earned it. And from the way Aiden's pants sagged as he tried in vain to run away from our daughter, it was clear that he wasn't anywhere close to deserving that kind of remuneration. By so much as allowing Johanna to share her toy with him, we'd be undermining her appreciation of one of life's most important lessons: You should never feel guilty about your abilities. Including your ability to repeatedly peg a fellow toddler with your Elmo ball as he sobs for mercy.Of course it is a short train ride from those potty stickers to Taggart Tunnel-esque catastrophe isn't it? I don't suppose it has dawned on the redistributionist crowd that the young Randian might discover on her own sharing her Elmo ball is more fun than playing alone. Presumably the wise parent must step in and redistribute the potty stickers for her in the same way the nanny state will find it necessary to redistribute her income as well. Naturally, the Hope and Changers find the "soggy-bottomed moocher's" prospects for earning his own potty training stickers utterly hopeless without a giant "potty training Equalization of Opportunity Act." One can only hope Elizabeth Warren is free to head the Potty Sticker Consumer Protection Agency.
Look, imagine what would happen if we were to enact some sort of potty training Equalization of Opportunity Act in which we regularized the distribution all of Johanna's and Aiden's potty chart stickers. Suddenly it would seem as if Aiden had earned the right to wear big-boy underpants, and within minutes you'd have a Taggart Tunnel-esque catastrophe on your hands, if you follow me.
Via Memeorandum
---Linked by Michelle Malkin. Buzzworthy. Thanks!
Most recent posts here.
These days charity and grace has no place. Instead it is the cancer of entitlement mentality that always demands the fruits of someone else's labor to be shared. That in itself is problematic. Just a few short years ago people would be ashamed to be taking things that other people had to work for.
ReplyDelete"Now let me explain why your son was wrong."
Love the confidence.
Therein lies the sad state of personal acheivement and self betterment verses the "you're special, maybe a little moreso, than everybody else" Governmental style.
ReplyDeletePlaying alone does suck, but enabling a moocher to mooch more is far worse. I've seen it with my son, taking his toys to daycare. You can see the sort, running up, and demanding (not politely asking to see it), having barely crossed the threshold. Sharing is fine, but it has adjusted our advice to our son - leave your toys at home, because everyone will demand to play with them.
And, the same demanders constantly fail to relinquish them when he wishes them back, with the browbeat "You gave it to me, so its MINE!" Gosh, where have I heard that before...
Sad state of affairs, indeed. We breed moocher-dom, instead of the essential skills to progress in life.
So is Eric Hague's piece supposed to be a negative depiction of Objectivism? Because I'm thinking Johanna sounds like a smart, capable kid, and Aidan sounds like a whiny wimp who will never earn anything on his own.
ReplyDelete