What happens when you exercise free speech?
Profane Language Puts Student Editor's Job On Line
One day people will understand again that whatever you believe, your words have consequences. A hundred and fifty years ago, here in Denver, your words had definite consequences. Your word was believed and taken at face value, because a man's word was his bond. So if you called a man a liar, you could expect a fight. If you threatened to kill a man, even to other people, once he heard about it he was coming after you (why should he believe you are lying or joking?). You actually had to think before spoke. Today, people call other people liars all the time. People say all sorts of rude things, because we have conditioned ourselves into believing that free speech is part of God's law, and that you can say anything you like with absolutely no consequences whatsoever, especially if what you say is controversial or somehow in the minority (we all know how the minorities, either of race, creed, or opinion, abuse their protections). Some even demand the "right" to desecrate patriotic and sacred religious symbols, all in the name of "free speech."
It appears that sometimes, though, when you least expect it, people will rise up and force consequences upon those who abuse their rights. Honestly, I think we should go back to the days when you could give someone a good punch in the nose when they offended you. I don't condone violence unless it's necessary, but at least 150 years ago, people were thoughtful and considerate before they spoke. Maybe if those consequences asserted themselves again, we could go back to that. Unfortunately, though, that means standards of morality, and the liberals would never possibly allow something as archaic as that to exist.
I think I'll exert my own free speech rights and get a bumper sticker that says:
"If you don't have anything nice to say...you must be a liberal Democrat."
Then there's this:
Study: Urban Sprawl A Factor In Global Warming
Why do elitists continue to insist that we all live in little-bitty apartments, all packed together like sardines? Why do they foist their ridiculous Communist ideals of "community" upon us all? (Remember Hillary's infamous "it takes a village" nonsense?) Several years back some elitist designers and architects came up with the idea of New Urbanism. Basically, you build artificial city-like "communities," governed by the residents of the "community" and based on the idea that everyone lives close, works in the area, gives up their cars and personal space (aside from their actual living quarters), and shares their lives together, one big, happy family. (If you can actually see through the pot smoke into the distant past, and if you read the above link, you'll recognize that what today is called "New Urbanism" looks very similar to what used to be called a "hippie commune." In fact, read that then click the link through to the "New Pedestrianism" article and see what you think.) Now they believe they've got another arrow for their quiver: "high-density housing saves the planet."
I'm going to present some ideas as to why New Urbanism/New Pedestrianism can't and won't work in real life:
1. Working and living arrangements are, for 90% of folks in the world, separate-but-equal considerations. When you mess with those, you're messing with the two most critical parts of their entire existence. I don't know of anyone who lives in north Denver, then takes a job in south Denver and moves to south Denver. You work wherever you can make the most money at the job you enjoy most, and you live wherever you can maximize your space and comfort and minimize your housing costs. That's the way the world works. You can't artificially force people to live and work in the same 5-block area, unless they are already heavily inclined or desirous to do so. Most folks aren't, and the ones that are already live in these goofy little communes.
2. You can artificially bring jobs to your New Urban commune, but you can't artificially bring good jobs to it. When I say good jobs, I mean something other than the retail or service-industry crud you would get in the commune. We have a few of these around here, and I've seen what they have to offer. Right now, that's not office parks and good jobs. Sure, you can build office parks and such and try to attach them or keep them close, but larger companies that bring more jobs and thus allowing more of your residents to work close by with more diverse kinds of work aren't going to be constrained to your little commune, or just go along with you because "it's the right thing to do". They're going to go and build and work where it makes the best business sense for them. Even if you forgo larger companies fill your office park with lots of small companies, the chances that those little (or even medium-sized) companies will fit all your residents' career needs and desires is very low, meaning lots of folks will still be working (and thus driving) elsewhere.
3. You can't force people to live that lifestyle unless they want to. Let's face it, New Urbanism is just another bit of trendy nonsense of the same sort that fueled the huge loft-apartment boom in downtown Denver back during the Internet boom. As an economic example of the exuberance (and ridiculousness) that fueled this push, Colorado Home Stop features 572 listings in the downtown Denver area, and pretty much all of them are loft apartments/condos. How many of those 572 listings are affordable (i.e., $200K or less)? 40. That's right. The median price is around $465K. There are lots of people who want to live in a big city, either because they grew up in New York and want all the fun and coolness of living in New York without actually living there, or because they're young and think that the constant activity and nightlife offered by a city is the ultimate in awesomeness. On the other hand, why does urban sprawl, so decried in the above article and in so many other "green" publications, continue to grow and thrive? Because once you grow up, move beyond nightlife and trendiness into real responsibility, and have kids, living in the city really sucks. History has shown for years that people will move away from the cities as soon as they have a realistic opportunity. Why is that? Most people don't want to live in a big city. There's the real answer, hippies...deal with it.
I could write so much more about this (and did, before deleting it all). But I think you all get the general idea. Go check out the links, and decide for yourself.
Thanks for reading along.
No comments:
Post a Comment