earthsedge

Here are two interesting articles, with two different perspectives.

The first one, a New York Times piece by Russell Shorto, was forwarded to me my boss in Amsterdam. It looks at the Dutch system and what America can learn from it. One of many thought provoking quotes:

There is another historical base to the Dutch social-welfare system, which curiously has been overlooked by American conservatives in their insistence on seeing such a system as a threat to their values. It is rooted in religion. “These were deeply religious people, who had a real commitment to looking after the poor,” Mak said of his ancestors. “They built orphanages and hospitals. The churches had a system of relief, which eventually was taken over by the state. So Americans should get over ‘socialism.’ This system developed not after Karl Marx, but after Martin Luther and Francis of Assisi.”

The second article is an essay by Charles Murray, who is looking at socialism from a totally different angle: the existential consequences. An interesting quote:

Put aside all the sophisticated ways of conceptualizing governmental functions and think of it in this simplistic way: Almost anything that government does in social policy can be characterized as taking some of the trouble out of things. Sometimes, taking the trouble out of things is a good idea. Having an effective police force takes some of the trouble out of walking home safely at night, and I’m glad it does.

The problem is this: Every time the government takes some of the trouble out of performing the functions of family, community, vocation and faith, it also strips those institutions of some of their vitality–it drains some of the life from them.

Murray goes on to speak of empty churches and the erosion of meaning in life (what he calls “European Syndrome”) in Europe, and how science will soon validate many of the positions of social conservatives.

Interesting stuff.