Entitlement to torture

What is the link or the gap that occurs in the political movement to remove entitlement programs like social security and welfare and then continue on to allow for torture and removing the right of habeus corpus.

Think about entitlement programs as efforts to provide support for individuals in the country. You receive social security to help with retirement, medicaid and medicare were to provide you with health care. These are social programs that help the individual.


The Bush Administration over the last six years attempted to remove these types of entitlements. The Republican Congress worked to remove social programs since the mid 90s. Recall Newt Gingrich talking about the undeserving black single parent on welfare. Some of Michael Moore's movies from the last few years document some of these things.

Removing entitlements moves the government away from the role of social service provider for the individual. The next step that occurs is one that moves the government away from the rights of the individual and towards the rights of the state. Individual rights are usurped by the right of the state. I believe this occurs because within the conservative movement there is the notion of hierarchy and adhering to it. The rights of the state are above the right of the individual in a power hierarchy.

So why would conservatives say that there is too much freedom or that freedom of speech is not good? Its because this interferes with their belief that the right of the state is simply higher in the hierarchy. Freedom of speech can be filled with dissent, or it can be critical of the government. If you want to establish a hierarchical superiority you can't allow dissent. Remember that movie called "Jesus Camp." The children were praying to images of George Bush, after all he is at the top of the hierarchy.

When the right of the state is viewed as being superior to the right of the individual, it is only a tiny step into the arena where torture is considered good or accepted or even promoted. After all if your rights as an individual are second or third to the rights of your government, then torturing you is low down the list. Torturing you might provide the key to reasserting the government and it may intimidate anyone else from dissenting.

Torture goes to the last step in the sense of the rights of the individual. Torture takes it to the ultimate conclusion which is that the tortured individual has no rights whatsoever, not even second or third place in the hierarchy.

This is the direction that the Bush Administration has moved the country. Torture is now officially approved. What makes you think that your rights as an individual are protected?