Should there be a standard test for political candidates with boxes
to check off in order for voters to understand the moral positions of
candidates and how they change over time (with subsequent or
semi-annual tests?) The morals of politicians actually matter these
days when the nation has taken a downturn in comparison to
traditional moral values; especially if there are consequences for
the nation for having done so.
Politicians tend to
become sycophants of the values or lack of that the wealthiest have
in order to curry favor and patronage. The rich own the broadcast
media and can quickly by adds on TV. to plink very fast those they
deem in there interest to downgrade socially and economically. The
lack of good morals may lead to permissiveness and license for
political duplicity, falsehoods, liars and so forth that are
deleterious to the principles of democracy.
Democracy itself can
be made to serve as screen to lever immorality to be the new normal,
pursue foreign wars in order to profit arms manufacturers and allow
blatant disregard for constitutional rights while feigning respect
for them. As in Huxley’s Animal Farm democracy can be called so as
long as the swine can be made to turn out to vote appropriately
before returning to their soma, swill and grog. Legal dope all day
may be the new normal for Democrats.
If the people are
made not to care about morals besides tolerance for anything, human
rights and the quality of life tends to decrease. A simple morality
exam of one-hundred questions should be enough to get the opinions of
politicians on record.
The rich and
broadcast media promote atheism and evolution intensively in the
media and assume that there is no God or possibility thereof. They
are quite firm in their opinions throughout Hollywood and inculcate
their values in the masses of the world so far as they can. Yet it is
an unreasoned opinion, or at least inadequately reasoned.
Theoretically, in a Multiverse God has unlimited opportunity to
exist in logical structures simultaneously with evolution,
predestination and salvation of the elect. However there are several
issues such as moving the world to the brink of nuclear war that
actually exist today that haven’t the past 30 years based in
problems of wrong political morals.
Failing to have a
basic national income is also a moral issue as well as an economic
one. Failing to have an expedited universal health care system to
serve when loopholes exclude many (such as having two places to live
on private property in warn and cold climates because they can’t
afford to build a home), or are elderly legal residents that didn’t
qualify for social security and so forth is another moral and
economic issue. Pragmatists might recognize that eliminating the
extremes of poverty would be a remedy for many criminal activities
motivated by dire poverty. The comfortable have several unreasoned
ideas about capitalism, socialism, axiology (value theory) and
political-economic philosophy and may be fast on their way to hell.
Preventing the poor from being prosperous by letting them have no
chips to enter prizes of their own work or construction is expensive
as are the costs of prison and drug rehabilitation. Pragmatism
doesn’t need to mean civil fascism as the privileged to to be
motivated toward.