Its difficult as a historian to have an opinion about today's political debates. We have a certain amount of knowledge about the past where we can tell you how similar situations have resulted. We can show you how radical laws and ideas were originally opposed by the masses but how it all turned out well. How many laws that we have today, that seem so normal that we couldnt imagine our lives without them, were considered abonimations to generations passed.
However, at the same time, a historian also knows that you cannot predict the future. No two situations come out the same. We can only hope to learn from the past and not make the same mistakes twice.
This is how i feel about the health care debate. This is why its so hard for me to talk about. We cannot know if it is a good idea or a bad idea because its never been put into practice. We cannot predict its effects. But the system we have isnt working, that much can be generaly agreed upon. So what are our other options? That is what i want to ask those who are opposed. What do you suggest we do with the people who have health problems but cant currently get insurance? Those with untreated lupus or diabetes or back and knee problems? Give me another option that is better than this one.
Until then, i will continue to point out that radical laws have turbed out for the best in the past and at the same time we cannot predict the future. So in understanding these two things maybe we can stol arguing so much.
No comments:
Post a Comment