Be Happy or We’ll Take Your Stuff and Make You Happy!

| November 13, 2007 | Comments (5)

fornationalhappiness.jpg

There is a lot of silly stuff in this editorial in yesterday’s New York Times. Perhaps the biggest bit of silliness is that the author doesn’t appear to know the difference between the words “pursuit” and “guarantee”. His motives seem to be honest, at least to me, even if his execution leaves a lot to be desired.

For instance, having decided that the government has long-neglected our happiness, he has decided that it should just make us happy. Donning his tye-died 1960s castoffs, he identifies the chief obstacle to peace, love, and warm fuzzies to be the acquisition of material goods. Not content to revive that old chestnut, he dips a toe into George Orwell Land.

More broadly, if the object of public policy is to maximize society’s well-being, more attention should be placed on fostering social interactions and less on accumulating wealth. If growing incomes are not increasing happiness, perhaps we should tax incomes more to force us to devote less time and energy to the endeavor and focus instead on the more satisfying pursuit of leisure.

Got that? You’re not happy because you want to get more stuff and you’re not interacting with those around you in the approved ways. Obviously, the answer is that the government should take your stuff so you can lounge about on couches and eat grapes or something. What’s assumed here is that once the government has taken your stuff and magically removed your motivation to acquire stuff (or to circumvent the gentle tyranny), it’s going to have to sustain you. Then, one can only suppose, you will have to participate in Approved Social Interactions that will increase your happiness. God help you if you profess anything but the most sublime happiness and personal satisfaction to the Happiness Commissars. You might have to attend Mandatory Happiness Education programs because, obviously, your notions of what make you happy are in error.

Yeah…no thanks. I’ve read this story already and seen the posters. It didn’t turn out so well.

I have a better idea for the author. Perhaps he should hunker down with a dictionary and a copy of the Declaration of Independence and do a quick review of what ” the pursuit of happiness” actually means. I’ll give him a hint or two. Not everyone who pursues something actually attains it and neither you nor your throwback friends are capable of knowing better than I what makes me happy.

(For those of you who were curious, the caption to the graphic reads “For National Happiness”.)

No related posts.

Category: Moonbat Nonsense

About Jimmie: View author profile.

Comments (5)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Rorschach says:

    Isn't that what happened in New Orleans? Everyone lounged around waiting on the government to meet their every need? Look how well that worked out….

  2. Martin says:

    I believe that the Declaration may have had in mind the second meaning of pursuit.

    Not so much chasing happiness as just working at and doing the things that make you happy.

    To be left alone and not forced to do what someone else thinks is "good for you."

    pur·suit

    Pronunciation: pər-ˈsüt, -ˈsyüt

    Function: noun

    1 : the act of pursuing

    2 : an activity that one engages in as a

    vocation, profession, or avocation

    :o ccupation. synonyms see work

  3. RA says:

    Liberals know everything. Its not your happiness that matters. Its their happiness that matters. Being a success does not make them happy. Being in control is what makes them happy. So don't worry, make them happy. When pigs fly.

  4. Jimmie says:

    Martin, neither definition gets you to where the author was. He assumes quite a bit between "pursuit" and "guarantee".

  5. [...] as I have written before, don’t seem to understand that the right of “the pursuit of happiness” written [...]

Leave a Reply




If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a Gravatar.

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE