Wednesday, 9 April 2014

Ben Stein Crazier than Expected

quote [ "[Stein] adds that federal policies can?t address poverty, and that instead what?s needed is an end to the separation of church and state: 'What will make the genuinely poor stop sabotaging themselves? Maybe, just maybe, if we let God back into the public forum it would help. I have seen spiritual solutions work miracles.'" ]

I loved his gameshow back in the day...

Ben Stein: End Poverty By Abolishing Church-State Separation
SUBMITTED BY Miranda Blue on Tuesday, 4/8/2014 4:36 pm


In an American Spectator column last week, conservative pundit Ben Stein argued that Americans living in poverty aren?t really poor because ?they almost always have indoor plumbing,? and in any case they just ?envy? the wealthy and are victims of their own ?self-sabotage.?

He adds that federal policies can?t address poverty, and that instead what?s needed is an end to the separation of church and state: ?What will make the genuinely poor stop sabotaging themselves? Maybe, just maybe, if we let God back into the public forum it would help. I have seen spiritual solutions work miracles.?

So, I just don?t see the problem in there being so many billionaires except for bare envy ? an extremely basic emotion. It is an emotion that the politicians and academics and race haters have been able to stir up for a long, long time. It leads to jobs for Democrats but not much else.

...

In olden times, poverty was the common human condition. In the USA, as recently as the Great Depression, poverty was commonplace. FDR might have exaggerated when he described one-third of the nation as ?ill housed, ill fed and ill clad...? But surely he was not far off.

Now, real poverty, where Americans lack cars or air conditioning (imagine that we now consider it poverty to lack something that was the ne plus ultra of luxury in my youth!) or solid food is extremely rare. Yes, the government designates many tens of millions as poor, but they almost always have indoor plumbing (which my mother did not have in her small town in the Catskills) and they are super nourished as opposed to mal-nourished. They get food stamps. They get free medical care. They get vouchers for many of the needs of life.

This is not to deny their sorrow and I am sad for them. But why are they poor? Senator Elizabeth Warren, a genuine moron, not a fake one, says it?s because of ?corporations.?

?

No, federal policy does not generally cause long-term unemployment and poverty. In general. Obviously, there are exceptions.

My humble observation is that most long-term poverty is caused by self-sabotage by individuals. Drug use. Drunkenness. Having children without a family structure. Gambling. Poor work habits. Disastrously unfortunate appearance. Above all, and counted in the preceding list, psychological problems (very much including basic laziness) cause people to be unemployed, have poor or no work habits, and enter and stay in poverty.

Impoverished people have personal problems. They may have had terrible childhoods. They may have been the victims of abuse. They are often the victims of their own abuse of drugs and alcohol. But they are not the victims of corporations or of the Federal Reserve. Their sad backgrounds lead them into self-destruction.

Is there any public policy that can help them? We just don?t know so far. But whipping up hate against the successful simply cannot do it. There is no connecting mechanism between envy and greater productivity. Quite the opposite. Envy legitimizes class hatred and idleness (see ?higher education ? 2014?) and produces nothing.

What will make the genuinely poor stop sabotaging themselves? Maybe, just maybe, if we let God back into the public forum it would help. I have seen spiritual solutions work miracles.
[SFW] [politics] [+10 WTF]
[by snowfox@6:51pmGMT]

Comments

spleen23 said @ 8:17pm GMT on 9th Apr [Score:2]
I agree with a lot of what he says, but he fails to take it far enough.

The hatred of the rich can be most self motivating method on the part of the poor to improve themselves, by revolting against the upper class. In this they can reduce the numbers of the poor by attrition in the violent overthrow of the upper class, and the survivors may take the wealth of power of the rich for themselves.

It's the logical next step of his beliefs.
KingPellinore said @ 7:24pm GMT on 9th Apr
At least he acknowledges the separation exists.
steele said @ 7:29pm GMT on 9th Apr
deletes written comment. backs away slowly ;)
seneschal said @ 10:34pm GMT on 9th Apr
seneschal said @ 10:34pm GMT on 9th Apr
lilmookieesquire said @ 7:45pm GMT on 9th Apr
I was so sad when I found out dull yet sympathetic the teacher from FBDO was a hard core conservative. I want to like the guy, but I can't, and now I just feel kind of sorry for him (in that even though he is rich and a major B-list celeb, it sucks that he has such a shitty world view) I can't hate him because even though I personally find his view points vile; borderline-unamerican; and totally out of touch with the basic fundamentals of what religion is suppose to be about... I think he actually believes this stuff and has this worldview... and more than anything I feel a little bad for the guy (the same way I feel about George W. Bush in a way- historically horrible president that will probably be considered the singular point of the true start of ushering in the decline of Pax Americana; probably a nice guy; I imagine he'd trade it all at the chance to be someone else in a heartbeat- kind of the embodiment of the Sad Keanu meme.
Dumbledorito said @ 8:18pm GMT on 9th Apr [Score:1 Underrated]
He was a speechwriter for Richard Nixon.

Fuck him.
lilmookieesquire said @ 9:41pm GMT on 9th Apr [Score:2]
If Nixon ran on the same platform today he'd probably be a little left of Obama; labeled a communist; and thrown out of washington.

I personally find the politicians of today much more vile.
sanepride said @ 11:13pm GMT on 9th Apr [Score:2]
From an ideological standpoint it's true that Nixon was pretty moderate, especially by current GOP standards. But in terms of vileness, it's hard to beat his overt criminality, paranoia, and shameless abuse of power. Really he set a standard of personal corruption for the ages. What's actually more vile today isn't the politicians per se, but the politics, that is to say the institutions of politics and power. The thing is, our current system is so corrupt, the criminal abuses committed by Nixon and his cronies wouldn't even be necessary. Once he got up to speed on our legitimized influence peddling and patronage I'm sure Tricky Dick would thrive if he were seeking political power today.
lilmookieesquire said @ 8:33am GMT on 10th Apr
Well the guys behind his administration basically ran Bush Jr.'s.- so while I think Bush didn't spearhead it, the vileness- in terms if rommy, Chaney, the turd blossom and company are def still around.
Dumbledorito said @ 1:02pm GMT on 10th Apr [Score:1 Underrated]
And they were all from previous Republican Administrations, including Nixon's. One theory about why Cheney was such a Douche Lord of the Sith was that he was (even more) embittered by his boss, Nixon, getting impeached just as Cheney had reached the halls of power.

Once back in a position to do something about it, he went on a bit of a revenge-spree, acted like everyone was out to get him, and tried to create a more Imperial Presidency. For those who really don't like the scope of Obama's powers, the stage was set by Bush/Cheney in the wake of 9/11.
sanepride said @ 9:16pm GMT on 10th Apr [Score:1 Underrated]
One of the enduring legacies of the Bush II regime is the consolidation of executive power engineered by Cheney and his henchman David Addington- specifically intended to undo the checks and limits imposed as a result of Nixon's abuses.

It's also worth noting that both Cheney and Rumsfeld first served in the Nixon administration.
lilmookieesquire said @ 8:33am GMT on 10th Apr
But solid point.
the circus said @ 11:20pm GMT on 9th Apr [Score:1 Informative]
I don't believe he believes his expressed viewpoints any more than the majority of other for profit creationists do. If you're smart enough to have a significant political career, make movies, and participate as an economics expert, you're too smart to be a creationist. The actions don't jibe with the attitudes. I think that he is an extreme elitist that sees humanity as a hierarchy with the poor as a broad natural class who deserve to toil for the luxuries of the rich, and that these serfs are to be manipulated for the use of others using eloquent speeches to inspire people to act against their own self interests. I think his own self ego was hurt when other elites just started seeing him as an actor, and not one of the aristocrats, so he made Expelled and started doing more to show he could still influence the unwashed masses. If I believed in hell I think there'd be a special place in it for people who have as much disdain for his fellow man as Ben Stein appears to have.
the circus said @ 11:21pm GMT on 9th Apr
Where's +1 Just Sad?
lilmookieesquire said @ 6:39am GMT on 10th Apr
I bet this is way more legit. I think I must be talking about his persona.
HoZay said @ 10:31pm GMT on 9th Apr
Don't feel bad for Ben Stein. He's on the same team as Ted Nugent, and like him, he's not just a dick, he gets paid to be a dick.
lilmookieesquire said @ 10:41pm GMT on 9th Apr
I guess he's an "unmensch"*

(meaning: an utterly unlikeable or unfriendly person).
mechanical contrivance said @ 8:11pm GMT on 9th Apr
Not just stupid, but especially stupid for a Jew to want America to become a theocracy. Does he not realize that if America became a theocracy, it would be a Christian theocracy? Jews would be marginalized or worse.
Dumbledorito said @ 8:19pm GMT on 9th Apr [Score:1 Good]
"Let religion into schools!"
"What, like Islam?"
"No, religion!"
"Buddhism?"
"Why don't you know what I'm talking about?!"
"Why don't you come out and say what you really mean?"
LurkerAtTheGate said @ 9:16pm GMT on 9th Apr
'or worse' is right. Ben Stein is a New York-area resident, right? Most people I've met from that area see the difference between Jews and Christians as a mild disagreement on interpretation.

Here in the South, I've heard the Israel-Palestine conflict described as "just more Muslims fighting Muslims." And that's at least benign ignorance - that doesn't get into the various flavors of racist/nazi conspiracy batshit. A great many Protestants down here think Catholics aren't Christian, for that matter.

He's seen spiritual solutions work miracles; We also have a slew of historical accounts of spiritual solutions being pretty damn 'final' in nature. I can't believe he's willing to risk it.
devilsad said @ 8:27pm GMT on 9th Apr
if we let God back into the public forum

The arrogance of these people always astonishes me. As if they 'let' God do anything. It's simply ludicrous to believe the all-powerful, all-knowing creator of everything has his hands tied because some of his creation decided that life was a little better for everyone if he was kept out of politics.

mechanical contrivance said @ 9:01pm GMT on 9th Apr [Score:1 Insightful]
Yes, the power of god is limited by the laws of the United States.
LurkerAtTheGate said @ 9:09pm GMT on 9th Apr
You have discovered the quickest way to move my political views to the left.
seneschal said @ 10:42pm GMT on 9th Apr
Okay, so his solutions and ideas generally are stupid and offensive.

Even his sense that North American poverty isn't commonly at the level of homelessness and famine levels belies his comments that separation of church and state are necessary to combat poverty because state actions cannot effectively do so.

So take away welfare and food stamps, and add more religion? He's saying that by being more like a third world country we'll have less poverty?
lilmookieesquire said @ 11:13pm GMT on 9th Apr
Well my gut feeling is that I imagine it's taking from two things he firmly believes:

1) "If people are poor it's because they deserve it"
(IMO: People who believe this seem to lead extremely closed/sheltered lives)

and

2) "religion can change people for the better"
(IMO: While I don't object to this idea, it can be true, it's more a symptom or tool, rather than the cause- and (as perhaps he is doing now) people can use religion to justify horrible horrible things ie: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children's_Crusade)

And I think he's succuming to the temptation to combine those two things to create a convenient universal truth that he can cling to and fits with his world believes and actions.

That said, I think that truth essentially boils down to what you said- he is essentially arguing that "by being more like a third world country we'll have less poverty"

Like Bush, and Jenny McCarthy, I think Stein is one of those people that, with perhaps only good intentions, unknowingly do/enable evil things.
(Kind of like that afriend post I made on SE that one time)
lilmookieesquire said @ 11:18pm GMT on 9th Apr
Granted I have no way to know this. He could just be an absolute pos.
seneschal said @ 3:32pm GMT on 10th Apr
Yeah, I agree that he probably believes the things that he's saying.

Defining evil is tricky. Likely some Nazis held genuine beliefs that jews weren't human and were evil creatures in need of extinction, while others simply held that as a conviction of convenience to justify evil deeds which they wished to undertake for more sinister reasons.

How much better is it to be stupid and wrong than evil and wrong?

Ben Stein's lack of comprehension of what poverty entails likely justifies what I perceived to be hostility towards the poor. I suspect that starvation deaths would result from the implementation of his touted policies.
mechanical contrivance said @ 4:37pm GMT on 10th Apr
There would be mass rioting before it got that bad.
lilmookieesquire said @ 10:17pm GMT on 10th Apr
Ya, people don't normally just sit down and starve to death. They'll get money/food however they can- and if not for them, for their kids.

I think things like food stamps, welfare, unemployment are kind of like pressure relief valves. But when you take those things away... well, I think the LA riots were an inkling of it.

That's what I don't understand. When you shit on the poor, you *don't* want them to have guns.
sanepride said @ 9:18pm GMT on 10th Apr
It would be nice to dismiss Stein as 'crazy', but unfortunately his view is probably pretty mainstream among significant portion of conservatives.

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.



Posts of Import
Karma
SE v2 Closed BETA
First Post
Subscriptions and Things

Karma Rankings
ScoobySnacks
HoZay
Paracetamol
lilmookieesquire
Ankylosaur