Why is it so hard

Au Contraire in my view. That dichotomy is largely irrelevant to anyone else but rightist libertarians.

 

No because there are agitators Left and Right with their own agenda and no concept of enough is enough; and so THEY will continue agitating and pushing for more long after the people who just want little or limited changes here and there are satisfied and have gone home . . . and those more determined agitators never give up and never stop pushing and somehow they always find more recruits to their causes that haven't thought things through, people who join the bandwagon and continue to help push ever more changes ever forward.

 

the problem is that liberal philosophy inevitably leads to the nanny state. it all seems to start with just helping people, but it never stops with a helping hand. that hand gets bigger as we notice the number of people who need "help". soon we are handing out more and more and running out of other people's money in the process. next we need to take more from the few who are producing, so they start disappearing in droves. after all, who wants the fruits of their labor being stolen at every turn??? eventually the number of productive citizens is overpowered by the non-productive and the nanny state is complete. the bureaucracy has become unwieldy, having grown exponentially to meet the demands of the "needy", and the productive, those few that are not suckling at the government teat, give up and head for friendlier climes.

 

the balance is the war between more and less. it is only the fools that think this battle is unnecessary.

 

Point being there's no stuggle between more and less government per se. it's only so in the eyes of rightist libertarians. Those on the left don't care about that dichotomy. For them it's probably the battle between solidarity and greed, or perhaps tolerance vs bigotry. It seems to me that all groups go by their own dichotomies, and thus try to define the current political struggles by those. And that leads to the problem of one group assigning a straw man position to another group because they view everything in that dichotomy, when the other group actually doesn't care about that dichotomy at all. It's just doing oneself a huge disservice, as it give you a very wrong understanding of what's going on.

Id est, to say that the left wants big government is pretty much pointless because they aren't concerned with that dichotomy at all. Just like it's pointless to say that libertarians want economic inequality: they simply don't see the dichotomy of economic equality as relevant. In short, libertarians don't care about ecnomic inequality, just as the left doesn't care about the size of government.

 

You are correct of course, but correct for a given definition of perceptual reality. Everyone's perception of reality is correct for their own background and mental wiring. It's only when -- for instance -- that one actually tries to fly by leaping off a tall building and flapping his arms that meta-reality supersedes micro-reality.

Regardless of group intentions -- good, bad, or in-between -- once cultural or legal inertia (in the United States anyway) is overcome so that a significant state of change is initiated then two things happen. The bulk of the successful change-group pat one another on the backs and then go home -- job done. The smaller group, however, knows that any change creates a window of possibility for momentum and so they roll up their sleeves and begin the process of recruitment and of apply pressure all over again so that they can produce the next change and then the next and then the next in their overarching game plan.

Let's take the gradual acceptance of the various styles of homosexuality into the overall U.S. culture. I'm not actually against this, but it is an emotionally charged issue. One aspect of that was the Right charging (heh) the Left of pushing gay/lesbian/trangender rights as a wedge issue so that afterwards they could ALSO push the door open for polygamy and other 'interesting' sexual groupings, as well as also dramatically lowering the national age of consent.

Naturally the Left vehemently denied having any such intention -- which most of them, the large group supporting the homosexual rights movement, probably did not. But a smaller group of people who were helping to organize them and standing right beside them rah-rahing about homosexual rights did have precisely that larger agenda, and so recently we now have a push to decriminalize polygamy, and will probably eventually find on the leftwing agenda a push to substantially lower the age of consent. Naturally similar patterns can be found in Right of Center groups and the history of their movements.

So perhaps in other nations, the creation of new laws altering customs DO NOT automatically create the momentum and encouragement for other groups to also surge forward with their side issue game plans; but in the United States that seems to be the pattern, yes.

 

"real americans"??????? if possible, you might want to contemplate what that remark reveals.

 

Why is it so hard for conservatives to understand we do NOT want their capitalism, their superior attitude, and the some how brain damaged idea that they have a right to tell us how to live. We do NOT want to be told what to eat, who to fck, how to fck, and especially what to think. We do NOT want their big corporations and Wall Street interfering in and controlling our lives.

IMO the country is getting really tired of conservatives interferring in our lives and trying to tell every one what to do. We do NOT want your big corporations and Wall Street charging us an arm and a leg for things we have a right to as human beings.