Democrats have the weirdest view of the “rights” that American citizens enjoy.
The right to bear arms? No, not really. The right to excuse one’s self from endorsing (and/or participating in) gay marriage? Not so much. The right to go to the bathroom without worrying about some shemale lurking outside the stall? Absolutely not. The right to have a community free of illegal aliens? Why, you can’t even use the TERM!
But the right to kill your unborn child? Of course!
The right to make others pay for your healthcare and your college tuition? Naturally!
And now, courtesy of 2020 Democratic presidential contender Beto O’Rourke, we’ve expanded the Democratic Party’s Bill of Rights once again: “Living close to work shouldn’t be a luxury for the rich. It’s a right for everyone.”
Yes, now it’s a “right” not just to have a job but to actually have a house close by. Amazing.
In a video, O’Rourke argued that the federal government should begin spending more on mixed-income housing and improved public transportation as a way to bring Americans closer to their place of work.
“Here’s a tough think to talk about, though we must,” he said. “Rich people are going to have to allow, or be forced to allow, lower-income people to live near them. We force lower-income, working Americans to drive one, two, three hours in either direction to get to their jobs, very often minimum wage jobs.”
Well, here we have two very different definitions of the word “force.” In Beto’s scenario, the government actually will force the rich to share their housing with people who can’t legitimately afford to live there. This will, in turn, drive down real estate prices in the area, lead to increased drug use and crime in the neighborhood, and, essentially, turn their posh communities into just the kinds of places where the rich don’t care to live.
In the other, Beto is talking about we “as a society” “forcing” people to live further away from their jobs. There is, of course, no such legal mandate. Indeed, this sort of faux-force is a natural byproduct of capitalism and the free market. Not everyone gets to live in Beverly Hills. Sorry.
O’Rourke is undoubtedly onto something as it pertains to making it easier for people to get to their places of employment, and there are probably steps that can be taken to make that dream a reality. But when you start misusing words like “rights” and “force” to make your point, you’re really just talking about forcing people to give up their rights so you can re-make society in your own vision. That’s not freedom; that is freedom’s opposite.