Due to a continuing interest in outdoor sports and pursuits, I subscribe to Outside Magazine. The monthly's liberal tilt is something I usually ignore, e.g., the fawning pieces on Al Gore, Robert Kennedy or Jimmy Carter.
A few days ago, I read a profile of a young female mountaineer who, in keeping with the magazine's preference for with anyone born with an infirmity, has a bloodflow-restricting condition.
According to Outside's profile, Ms. Levine,
"worked on Wall Street and as a finance director for the Governator."
OK.
She is then quoted as saying, in answer to a question regarding the relative dangers of climbing versus Wall Street,
"In one, you're in extreme environment with no control. You've got to keep your bearings in storm after storm. But in climbing you actually accomplish something."
It's one of those typical liberal generalizations- "Wall Street" means oceans of money for undeserving capitalists who create no value, while a mountaineer is next to Godliness.
Here's another perspective.
"Wall Street," or, more properly, the American financial system, provides capital which fuels the growth of countless business activities, providing jobs for millions of Americans. The provision of inexpensive, secure electronic systems has markedly affected, in a positive manner, the functioning of business activity throughout our country, and the world.
Mountain climbing seems to be among the most selfish, valueless pursuits in the outdoors. What is accomplished that benefits anyone but the climber? I'm sure there are conservatives who climb, too. But they probably don't disparage productive business effort by comparison.
Just another view of how liberal values differ markedly from those of conservatives.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment