Michael Medved and the Philosophy of Conservative Elimination

I am going to briefly revisit my theory regarding conservative values. I am incited to do so by today’s Michael Medved radio show and his comments on homelessness. On the show today Mr. Medved noted that homeless people drive down the property values of otherwise hard-working individuals. He also noted that homeless people should either be imprisoned (eliminated) or put in to shelters (controlled). He took issue with a caller who indicated that he fed the homeless on a weekly basis. Even though the homeless this caller was feeding were children and Vietnam veterans.

Mr. Medved’s position clearly reinforces my belief that the typical conservative point of view is both hypocritical and immoral. As I noted in a previous blog entry, conservatives values are squarely on animal modalities. Primarily those of protection (of wealth), elimination of threats (to their positions and possessions through any and all means) and to a lesser degree control (control of their problems). The focus of their energies is protecting their positions, their assets and their wealth. They have no humanity and they typically place very low value on the souls of human beings.

If I am not mistaken although Mr. Medved professes to be Jewish. And like most hypocrites he behaves contrary to his religion and his god. Mr. Medved sees no value in feeding the homeless because such an action does not “eliminate” the problem. Eliminating Mr. Medved’s problem (i.e. protection of his property value) is more important that some moral idea like compassion - despite the fact that the value placed upon such an intangible is to be sought:

[If] you offer your compassion to the hungry and satisfy the famished creature, then shall your light shine in darkness. [Isaiah 58:10) .

Assuming that the homeless person was not Jewish, Mr. Medved may be have been able to avoid the teachings of his own religion:

“The highest level of all is the one who supports the hand of a Jew who is falling and gives to him (1) a gift or (2) a loan or (3) creates a partnership with him or (4) creates (invents) work for him in order to strengthen his hand, before he becomes dependent on asking [for assistance]. Concerning this, it says, ‘And you shall strengthen him as a stranger and as a resident-settler that he should live among you’ (Leviticus 25:35) that is, support him before he falls and becomes needy.” (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Laws of Gifts to the Poor 10:7)

However, Mr. Medved made no distinction between a Jewish and Non-Jewish homeless person. He simply wants them either eliminated or controlled in a such a way that his material position is protected.

As I noted previously, conservatives not only seek to eliminate their problems without giving any consideration to human souls, they often create the problems through their failure to share their wealth, or by denying people the means to solve the problem on their own accord. Without complicating this blog with a long social dialogue, I’ll just briefly mention what I believe are the root causes of homelessness. These would include primarily a lack of affordable rental housing, an increase in poverty, a decline in social programs (including public assistance) and mental illness. And note that a moral person has values placed on things like compassion, love, sharing, caring, self-sacrifice, creating joy and happiness. And that animals focus on what is relevant in the material world - including position, property, and wealth (especially accumulation). In light of these differing values, I wonder which side Mr. Medved falls on? I also wonder if (through some calamity in his life or even some global calamity) Mr. Medved would like to be treated as he would treat the homeless? If a meteor struck the earth tomorrow and Mr. Medved was left without a cave to live in and no means of creating any wealth for himself and his family (food, etc.) would he like a nice jail cell somewhere? I wonder if Mr. Medved was not wealthy and established in a post apocalyptic world if he would frown upon a hand-out of food from a kind and compassionate human? While some would like to hope that Mr. Medved is (in fact) placed in that position some day, I hope instead that he becomes more human; that he considers the plight of less fortunate people, that he becomes more compassionate; and that he grows spiritually and not materialistically. Good Luck Mr. Medved!