Nazis, Commies, and Manicheans in the Health-Care Debate

"I commend the author in calling for Obama to resist the temptation to use the divisive nature of our party system."
I must admit, I am one who wishes President Obama would stop working with the other party. I stand convicted. Maybe I need to re-think that notion.
I also commend the author in calling for those in the media to stop perpetuating this divisiveness! All this name-calling and fear!
I also agree that Christianity is a movement of peace. The causes of social justice, freedom and equality are the reasons I campaigned and voted for Obama.
I pray that all Americans would realize that we all want basically the same things: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We all want to be healthy, provide for our families, feel safe in our communities.
We all agree on the "what," we just don't agree on the "how!" However, that doesn't mean we need to resort to lies and name-calling, fear and stubborness. As the author commented, "The good guy/bad guy motif made him blind to the point of a fearful child's incoherence."
As long as we continue to play this game, our country will be stuck, like spoiled brats engaged in a screaming match: "I KNOW you are, but what am I?"

I think you proved his point and missed what he's saying.

This blog is on the "side," if you will, that has consistently been attacked for not being "politically correct"; unfortunately, it's been a characteristic of the human race that it needs a scapegoat in order to justify its actions. This blog has never done that except when its "enemies" have refused to be confronted about its attitudes or actions.

And furthermore, Jesus was pointing to Himself -- but, as a rule, in conversations with people who questioned His authority (because they wanted it for themselves). That is not to be confused with ideological warfare.

I would not call what we see on Fox News a "point of view". Deliberate misinformation is not a point of view. They fit the definition of professional propagandists: They incite fear and anger by their own angry shouting and by providing deliberate misinformation. They use inflammatory words and images such as "Communist, Nazi, socialism, death panel, rationing, and euthanasia". Those topics have nothing to do with the proposed reform, they are merely used to provoke a strong emotional reaction in their viewers. It works. One has only to see the angry, contorted faces on the demonstrators at town hall meetings to see that it works. Interviews with the demonstrators revealed that they had virtually no factual information about the proposed reform, Fox "News" certainly hasn't provided them any.

You are absolutely correct in pointing out that only Jesus is able to separate the wheat from the weeds. The workers asked the farmer, "Should we weed out the thistles?" They were ready to figure out who was good and who was evil, but the Master said, "No, if you weed the thistles, you'll pull up the wheat, too. Let them grow together until harvest time. Then I'll instruct the harvesters to pull up the thistles and tie them in bundles for the fire, then gather the wheat and put it in the barn."

I believe you are also correct in stating the the problem is not so much right side vs wrong side, as it is good guy vs bad guy. When people are labeled baby killers, commies, and Nazis (or state that opponents have labeled them as such when they have not) some in this world feel justified in committing any violence toward the "evil doers." The Southern Poverty Law Center documents 75 cases of domestic terrorism/hate crimes since the OKC bombing in 1995.

People who stir up hatred and violence for their own selfish ends should be held as accountable as those who carry out the violence.

Peace.

If the left did it on a regular basis simply to inflame, no, but the "left" -- in practice, those who simply disagree with the right -- doesn't generally do that.

This is a very thoughtfully written piece. I commend the author in calling for Obama to resist the temptation to use the divisive nature of our party system. I also agree that Christianity is a movement of peace, which is why I do not support many of Obama's policies. Many of us who believe in holistic social justice hope and pray that whatever actions are necessary to secure justice in our society, it includes freedom and equality.

"Noble thoughts. I agree we should not divide the world into "Good guys" and "Bad guys"; we are all capable of being both. As Gandhi said " Hate the sin, not the sinner".

Great sentiment. Thanks for evening the playing field.

"That said,"

Uh-oh. I smell some "good guy" v. "bad guy" talk coming.

"those who are doing it just happen to be Republicans who seem to have little interest in facts."

Of course. No interest whatsoever. Why support health care reform when benevolent Unicorns will come to save us all. That's what I believe. I can simply assume that all the conservatives here are with me on this.

"Ideologues are dangerous,"

Absolutely. Approaching politics with a perspective with which to frame each issue only leads to danger. Better to simply pick charismatic, intelligent leaders who make us feel good. Coincidentally, all the people who seem intelligent and make you feel good happen to be Democrats.

"Bible-thumping evangelical's like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and have made a ruin of our public discourse and policy."

Sadly, they are the only two conservatives, which is especially problematic since one of the above is dead.

"Jesus would no doubt throw these money-changers out of the temple."

No doubt whatsoever. There is a one-to-one parallel between Pat Robertson and the money changers. And, if Pat Robertson were not in a temple, Jesus would probably throw him, or at least shake him a bit.

"Lord, forgive them for they know not what they do. "

Nothing like a contemptuous prayer for a dead man.

"Frankly, the CEO's of most insurance companies should learn a new trade (say carpentry or gardening), so they can do something useful."

Of course, most of them arrived at their position by virtue of their lack of a blue-collar skill. They chose well on career day. I'm sure that, if we were to move to a government run system, none of these people would find work within that system.

"I'm not a Manichean,"

Who would accuse you of such a thing?

"they may love their kids and even give to charity (like pimps giving money to a women's shelter),"

So you are a (Manichean)

"but on this they are (sorry) evil and (forgive me) wrong"

You are (ranting) making great points and I (am flabbergasted; kinda depressed) I am glad for your contribution to this debate.

"Any open-eyed look at public health metrics will verify this. "

Oh, great. Let's get down to data and metrics.

"The health care system (as a totality, not always specific instances) has become a criminal enterprise leading to much human suffering and many unnecessary deaths. It is corporate controlled genocide of many un and under-insured."

Great metrics. Thank you for the hard data. I think we all now know how to reform our health care system.

So let me get this straight...

The author of this article is trying to say that any attempt to say one side is right and the other wrong is Manichean???

I mean, really? Are we supposed to, maybe, ignore Jesus' own words about those not for Him are against Him? The sheep and the goats? The wheat and the weeds? That He most definitely said He was right and those who were against Him were wrong?

And for a blogger on Sojo to say that "The key is to have the good guys in power and oppose the bad guys when they have power" is a negative way runs counter to what Sojo stands for and has been doing. Or is this another "We're culture warriors who say we don't believe in the culture war" blind?

Thank you for your comment.

"The key is to have the good guys in power and oppose the bad guys when they have power" is a description of logical conclusion of Manicheanism and not my own view. If I believed this I would Manichean.

On the second point, Jesus clearly said that he would be the one to separate "wheat and the weeds" and it was up to us to spread the Gospel. We are called to stand up for what is true and right, and I am not saying not to, it is the condemnation of the other in their person, which need to be looked at.

If it was up to man to do the separating weeds from wheat in the ultimate sense imagine the damage: St Augustine was a Manichean before so could never be trusted as he was shown to be an enemy of Christ; same goes with St. Paul, after all we know a tiger never changes it stripes. Of course that is foolish as St Paul and St Augustine are great Christians.

I stand by what I said, the cold war made us Manichean, seeing only good guys and bad guys blinds us to when the other side is right and when we might be wrong. Manichean is more than seeing one side as right and the other as wrong. If that were the case, we would be in a better place, rather it is seeing one side as GOOD GUYS and the other as BAD GUYS. Good guys can only do good, as bad guys can only do bad. It rejects the person of the other side. It is also very unchristian as Christians believe we are all bad guys that need a Jesus.

Noble thoughts. I agree we should not divide the world into "Good guys" and "Bad guys"; we are all capable of being both.
As Gandhi said " Hate the sin, not the sinner".

That said, I hate the contemptible lies many are spouting about health care reform, and those who are doing it just happen to be Republicans who seem to have little interest in facts. Ideologues are dangerous, including (often especially) many who call themselves Christians. Bible-thumping evangelical's like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and have made a ruin of our public discourse and policy. Jesus would no doubt throw these money-changers out of the temple.

Lord, forgive them for they know not what they do.

In the meantime, let's mobilize for social justice. Frankly, the CEO's of most insurance companies should learn a new trade (say carpentry or gardening), so they can do something useful. I'm not a Manichean, they may love their kids and even give to charity (like pimps giving money to a women's shelter), but on this they are (sorry) evil and (forgive me) wrong. Any open-eyed look at public health metrics will verify this.

The health care system (as a totality, not always specific instances) has become a criminal enterprise leading to much human suffering and many unnecessary deaths. It is corporate controlled genocide of many un and under-insured.

"They use inflammatory words and images such as "Communist, Nazi, socialism, death panel, rationing, and euthanasia".

But when the left does it, it's a "blog worth reading". Right?

Doctors and access to them has no effect on health and longevity?

I think very few people who study medicine or public health would agree with your statement. Of the 49 nations with longer life expectancy, a strong public involvement is a component of most of them, across many cultures with their own bad habits. American's have some bad habits, but regular exams and education can encourage a person to change those habits.

The details of Health reform are far from settled. I, too, think thus far there has not been enough discussion of cost control. When there is (as when it has been suggested a scientific non-partisan study group exam what procedures are truly effective, people irrationally cry "rationing!").

Comparative health system metrics show 150 billion per annum could be cut from administrative costs by having a single payer (not to be confused with single provider) health system. Approximately 18 cents of every health care dollar is needlessly spent on the nightmarish administration of thousands of different carriers, all with their own rules, forms and requirements.

A Medicare like system for all would eliminate most of this waste, not to mention the obscene compensation most for-profit carriers pay their executives, compensation which has little or nothing to do with the quality of care a patient receives -- in fact it is usually tied to how much profit they show, which is perversely connected to the denial of care.

But, people say, a single-payer option isn't a political reality any time soon. So, we shall see. It appears, at least, that more (most?) people will be covered one way or another, and that is a step in the right direction.

Here is an essay containing specific suggestions for reducing costs while improving care:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/opinion/13gaw...

The future of reform is far from certain now. What is certain is that staying on the current course is a recipe for disaster.

14,000 are losing their health insurance daily. Average premiums to the largest insurance companies have risen 87% since 2002. Profits of the top ten insurance companies have increased 428%. If you believe the market is the most efficient way to deliver goods and services (which sometimes it is) it is clearly not working in the U.S. for Health care.

A strong public option seems to be essential to keep these market forces run amuck in check.

"Noble thoughts. I agree we should not divide the world into "Good guys" and "Bad guys"; we are all capable of being both. As Gandhi said " Hate the sin, not the sinner".

Great sentiment. Thanks for evening the playing field.

"That said,"

Uh-oh. I smell some "good guy" v. "bad guy" talk coming.

"those who are doing it just happen to be Republicans who seem to have little interest in facts."

Of course. No interest whatsoever. Why support health care reform when benevolent Unicorns will come to save us all. That's what I believe. I can simply assume that all the conservatives here are with me on this.

"Ideologues are dangerous,"

Absolutely. Approaching politics with a perspective with which to frame each issue only leads to danger. Better to simply pick charismatic, intelligent leaders who make us feel good. Coincidentally, all the people who seem intelligent and make you feel good happen to be Democrats.

"Bible-thumping evangelical's like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and have made a ruin of our public discourse and policy."

Sadly, they are the only two conservatives, which is especially problematic since one of the above is dead.

"Jesus would no doubt throw these money-changers out of the temple."

No doubt whatsoever. There is a one-to-one parallel between Pat Robertson and the money changers. And, if Pat Robertson were not in a temple, Jesus would probably throw him, or at least shake him a bit.

"Lord, forgive them for they know not what they do. "

Nothing like a contemptuous prayer for a dead man.

"Frankly, the CEO's of most insurance companies should learn a new trade (say carpentry or gardening), so they can do something useful."

Of course, most of them arrived at their position by virtue of their lack of a blue-collar skill. They chose well on career day. I'm sure that, if we were to move to a government run system, none of these people would find work within that system.

"I'm not a Manichean,"

Who would accuse you of such a thing?

"they may love their kids and even give to charity (like pimps giving money to a women's shelter),"

So you are a (Manichean)

"but on this they are (sorry) evil and (forgive me) wrong"

You are (ranting) making great points and I (am flabbergasted; kinda depressed) I am glad for your contribution to this debate.

"Any open-eyed look at public health metrics will verify this. "

Oh, great. Let's get down to data and metrics.

"The health care system (as a totality, not always specific instances) has become a criminal enterprise leading to much human suffering and many unnecessary deaths. It is corporate controlled genocide of many un and under-insured."

Great metrics. Thank you for the hard data. I think we all now know how to reform our health care system.

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.Health Care Metrics

What We Pay:

Cost for Health Care Per Capita by Nation: More than any other nation, by a vast amount.

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/46/2/38980580.pdf

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/14/wh...

What We Get:

Infant Mortality Rates by Nation: 36 Nations Better

http://www.geographyiq.com/ranking/ranking_Infa...

Life Expectancy Rates by Nation: 49 Nations Better

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-wo...

Access to Heath Care and effects on Public Health: 47 million uninsured (including 10 million children), tens of millions under insured, 18,000-22,000 unnecessary deaths because of lack of access.

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2008/january/make_that...

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/

Excessive Administrative Costs in Current Private System: $150 Billion Wasted. Myriad carriers causing unnecessary complexity

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/21/wh...

Sampling of Health Care System Comparisons by Nation:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/17/opinion/17kru...

I'm not satisfied with the these metrics and the incentives in the current system which propagate them. Are you?

Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Mt. 3.10 · Lk. 3.9

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.Health Care Metrics

What We Pay:

Cost for Health Care Per Capita by Nation: More than any other nation, by a vast amount.

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/46/2/38980580.pdf

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/14/wh...

What We Get:

Infant Mortality Rates by Nation: 36 Nations Better

http://www.geographyiq.com/ranking/ranking_Infa...

Life Expectancy Rates by Nation: 49 Nations Better

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-wo...

Access to Heath Care and effects on Public Health: 47 million uninsured (including 10 million children), tens of millions under insured, 18,000-22,000 unnecessary deaths because of lack of access.

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2008/january/make_that...

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/

Excessive Administrative Costs in Current Private System: $150 Billion Wasted. Myriad carriers causing unnecessary complexity

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/21/wh...

Sampling of Health Care System Comparisons by Nation:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/17/opinion/17kru...

I'm not satisfied with the these metrics and the incentives in the current system which propagate them. Are you?

Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Mt. 3.10 · Lk. 3.9

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

Health Care Metrics

What We Pay:

Cost for Health Care Per Capita by Nation: More than any other nation.

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/46/2/38980580.pdf

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/14/wh...

What We Get:

Infant Mortality Rates by Nation: 36 Nations Better

http://www.geographyiq.com/ranking/ranking_Infa...

Life Expectancy Rates by Nation: 49
Nations Better

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-wo...

Access to Heath Care and effects on Public Health: 47 million uninsured (including 10 million children), tens of millions under insured, 18,000-22,000 unnecessary deaths because of lack of access.

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2008/january/make_that...

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/

Excessive Administrative Costs in Current Private System: $150 Billion Wasted. Myriad carriers causing unnecessary complexity

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/21/wh...

Sampling of Health Care
System Comparisons by Nation:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/17/opinion/17kru...

I'm not satisfied with these metrics and the incentives in the
current system which propagate them. Are you?

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Mt. 3.10 · Lk. 3.9

Doctors and access to them has no effect on health and longevity?

I think very few people who study medicine or public health would agree with your statement. Of the 49 nations with longer life expectancy, a strong public involvement is a component of most of them, across many cultures with their own bad habits. American's have some bad habits, but regular exams and education can encourage a person to change those habits.

The details of Health reform are far from settled. I, too, think thus far there has not been enough discussion of cost control. When there is (as when it has been suggested a scientific non-partisan study group exam what procedures are truly effective, people irrationally cry "rationing!").

Comparative health system metrics show 150 billion per annum could be cut from administrative costs by having a single payer (not to be confused with single provider) health system. Approximately 18 cents of every health care dollar is needlessly spent on the nightmarish administration of thousands of different carriers, all with their own rules, forms and requirements.

A Medicare like system for all would eliminate most of this waste, not to mention the obscene compensation most for-profit carriers pay their executives, compensation which has little or nothing to do with the quality of care a patient receives -- in fact it is usually tied to how much profit they show, which is perversely connected to the denial of care.

But, people say, a single-payer option isn't a political reality any time soon. So, we shall see. It appears, at least, that more (most?) people will be covered one way or another, and that is a step in the right direction.

Here is an essay containing specific suggestions for reducing costs while improving care:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/opinion/13gaw...

The future of reform is far from certain now. What is certain is that staying on the current course is a recipe for disaster.

14,000 are losing their health insurance daily. Average premiums to the largest insurance companies have risen 87% since 2002. Profits of the top ten insurance companies have increased 428%. If you believe the market is the most efficient way to deliver goods and services (which sometimes it is) it is clearly not working in the U.S. for Health care.

A strong public option seems to be essential to keep these market forces run amuck in check.

I think the mortality rates are a product of how Americans treat their
bodies. Europeans are healthier, and that isn't because of doctors.

I agree we should reform the system. I do not agree, nor has anyone really
bothered to demonstrate, that Obama's plan will cut expenditures.

I think the mortality rates are a product of how Americans treat their
bodies. Europeans are healthier, and that isn't because of doctors.

I agree we should reform the system. I do not agree, nor has anyone really
bothered to demonstrate, that Obama's plan will cut expenditures.

Doctors and access to them has no effect on health and longevity?

I think very few people who study medicine or public health would agree with your statement. Of the 49 nations with longer life expectancy, a strong public involvement is a component of most of them, across many cultures with their own bad habits. American's have some bad habits, but regular exams and education can encourage a person to change those habits.

The details of Health reform are far from settled. I, too, think thus far there has not been enough discussion of cost control. When there is (as when it has been suggested a scientific non-partisan study group exam what procedures are truly effective, people irrationally cry "rationing!").

Comparative health system metrics show 150 billion per annum could be cut from administrative costs by having a single payer (not to be confused with single provider) health system. Approximately 18 cents of every health care dollar is needlessly spent on the nightmarish administration of thousands of different carriers, all with their own rules, forms and requirements.

A Medicare like system for all would eliminate most of this waste, not to mention the obscene compensation most for-profit carriers pay their executives, compensation which has little or nothing to do with the quality of care a patient receives -- in fact it is usually tied to how much profit they show, which is perversely connected to the denial of care.

But, people say, a single-payer option isn't a political reality any time soon. So, we shall see. It appears, at least, that more (most?) people will be covered one way or another, and that is a step in the right direction.

Here is an essay containing specific suggestions for reducing costs while improving care:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/opinion/13gaw...

The future of reform is far from certain now. What is certain is that staying on the current course is a recipe for disaster.

14,000 are losing their health insurance daily. Average premiums to the largest insurance companies have risen 87% since 2002. Profits of the top ten insurance companies have increased 428%. If you believe the market is the most efficient way to deliver goods and services (which sometimes it is) it is clearly not working in the U.S. for Health care.

A strong public option seems to be essential to keep these market forces run amuck in check.

I think the mortality rates are a product of how Americans treat their
bodies. Europeans are healthier, and that isn't because of doctors.

I agree we should reform the system. I do not agree, nor has anyone really
bothered to demonstrate, that Obama's plan will cut expenditures.

I think the mortality rates are a product of how Americans treat their
bodies. Europeans are healthier, and that isn't because of doctors.

I agree we should reform the system. I do not agree, nor has anyone really
bothered to demonstrate, that Obama's plan will cut expenditures.