Essay on Reform

A little long but I hope you will read it.

It’s an often-used word in politics. It’s a simple word with various meanings. Basically, in most contexts, it is used as an alternative to abolish or remove. So if one does not want to abolish something they say they are going to reform it or fix it.

The dictionary says, Reform:
a : to put or change into an improved form or condition b : to amend or improve by change of form or removal of faults or abuses.
2. : to put an end to (an evil) by enforcing or introducing a better method or course of action
3: to induce or cause to abandon evil ways
4: a : to subject (hydrocarbons) to cracking b : to produce (as gasoline or gas) by cracking

 Since it is used so much today in various contexts I thought it was worth a closer look. It is commonly used in politics to refer to any kind of change, especially toward problems or failures, and often as a cure-all. I mention only some applications of the term.

The word conjures up another meaning also used in education, reform school. Decades ago this was a term for school dealing with behavior problems or problem students. Hence, a student was sent to reform school. It was not generally considered a good thing. But it was thought of as a place that might straighten out kids with problems. There were no guarantees though it was hailed as a possibility. (…when other attempts fail)

And there is the religious use of the root word in Christianity, referring to Luther and Protestants in the reformation. Some religious institutions use the word in their name.

 And there is a broader social use of the term “reform movement”:

A reform movement is a kind of social movement that aims to make gradual change, or change in certain aspects of society, rather than rapid or fundamental changes. A reform movement is distinguished from more radical social movements such as revolutionary movements.

Reformists’ ideas are often grounded in liberalism, although they may be rooted in socialist (specifically, Social democratic) or religious concepts. Some rely on personal transformation; others rely on small collectives, such as Mahatma Gandhi’s spinning wheel and the self sustaining village economy, as a mode of social change. Reactionary movements, which can arise against any of these, attempt to put things back the way they were before any successes the new reform movement(s) enjoyed, or to prevent any such successes.  (Wikipedia)

(note – its a softer approach than revolution)

So there is a lot of talk about reform. Politically, the word has been loosely used (overused) to suggest change needed or necessary. It is used as a blanket description for change, to improve or tweak something. So far, the overuse of the word has not ruined the idea behind it, completely. It still carries popularity and high regards to some folks. But politically, I’m sure many people roll their eyes when they hear the word, as I do. And there has been a good amount of reform done already, which many people disagree with.

Sometimes reforming a bad idea is not the right solution. Often “reform” of something with inherent problems, and plagued from the beginning, is not the best solution. But it still gets used in those contexts as the cure. Strange how liberals who tout “pro-choice” claim that abortions are a solution in dealing with life; but when dealing with federal Government will only go as far as to call for “reform” – and usually dragged kicking and screaming to that position.

To abolish an agency seems to be against their nature. But in dealing with life, they contend abortion should always be an available option – for any and all reasons. In fact, don’t ask why. To abolish a failed agency or program is much tougher. Yet they want a streamlined, simple process to get an abortion. To abolish a program is a monumental task, nothing steam-lined about it, if it can be done– “Let the objections begin.”  And liberals like it that way. Even reforming is a challenge. They want the bar set very high to abolish a program or agency, but set very low to get an abortion. But aren’t they based on the same principle, getting rid of something unwanted and a burden to the greater whole? (sorry ….)

Then there are those politicians who take on the banner as “a reformer” politically. You’ve heard them say, “vote for the reformer… vote for the true reformer”.  Few seem to want to campaign as the abolitionist. (I know, except for the congressman from Texas)  Yet there is something to be said for adopting the abolitionist banner, or at least making it a philosophy that is not so stigmatized and ridiculed a position as it is now.  “Reform” must sound better to people. (proabably poll tested)

The Declaration of Independence was a more than a reform philosophy. They tried the reforms. They pleaded to the King, and they got no relief. In fact, the King made things harder and more difficult for them. “Such” was the “patient sufferance” of their colonies. No, it called for more than reform; it demanded some drastic steps. And it was not easy.

Leftists want it easy to have an abortion on demand but want it difficult to rein in out of control, encroaching bureaucracy. Such is our “patient sufferance” today. Yet they want abortion to be as available as possible; any restrictions on it is a restriction too many to them.  Liberals will hold rallies or protests to “keep abortion legal”…”save a woman’s right to choose” … and protect women’s right to an abortion. (hailed as a civil right) Then the same folks trot out signs to say “No, you cannot cut this program, spending, or end this government agency. It’s not fair.” Fairness…

So there we have it

Scissors to the back of the head and a suction hose to abort babies; but no technique is painless enough or “necessary” to eliminate an agency that outlived its usefulness.  And the stage of development is of no concern for babies. In fact, we even have a Secretary of Heath and Human Services  who very much advocates for that ‘scissors to the head’ treatment of babies.  How does she feel about a ‘badly conceived idea’ that should be stopped in its tracks? (…like ObamaCare) 

You know the answer…

Leave your comments on reform (or anything else) or the way it is used? Your thoughts…

7 comments on “Essay on Reform

  1. clyde says:

    Could going BACK to a representative,Constitutional republic be considered reform,or radical? Jus’ askin’.

    Like

    • bullright says:

      Clyde, yea, you got it. We call it reform. I’d go for that. But its radical by their standards. Except when they say reform they usually mean something different. Why is that not the reform they suggest? I just don’t know if they can be trusted.

      Like

      • clyde says:

        Of course they CANNOT be trusted. Good grief,look at the lies they tell EVERY DAMN DAY. Got a hunch tomorrow ain’t going to be a good one for’em either.

        Like

        • bullright says:

          Clyde, I’m a waiting for tomorrows’ spin. It’s going to be a work of art. Might be their worst performance yet. But one thing they will never say is they’re wrong. I will go back to at least Nixon resigned. Heck they already have it planned where if they loose they are going all out for a public option and bigger plan. But then they’ll just ignore a smack down from the Court anyway.

          Like

  2. pepperhawk says:

    Bull,
    Great article about “reform”. To me we need to go right back to the Constitution and get rid of all these agencies that were never supposed to exist costing us an arm and a leg. I’m sick of the pols and don’t trust any of them to do the right thing anymore.

    Your abortion analogy was very good. And where did that right come from?

    Like

    • bullright says:

      Pepp: btw, I had in mind the dep of Ed for one, as we’d been talking about it.

      Like

    • bullright says:

      Pepp: thanks. Yea, I honestly didn’t set out to make a comparison of Abortion — court fiat not law. But its a shame how they have more respect for that than all our other problems. I totally agree. I get heaves now when they say reform. As Clyde says why can’t we reform to the Constitution? That’s what a rational person thinks.

      But when I read those political definitions of reform, then we should be about reformed out by leftists’ definitions.(most of this stuff done under the guise of reform — something leftists worked decades on) According to that we are “reactionaries” if we resist or protest liberalism’s reforms, trying to prevent more crap foisted on us. So they have labeled us. Except we need to be more on offense rather than defense. Time for true reforms?

      Like

Comments...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s