This article in the homesunday section of the StarTribune is typical of the loony Left. A nice, idealistic young family of four is moving into a 207 square foot portable cottage out in the country. You would think it was the best thing since sliced bread.
Now, it is none of my business; the libertarian in me exhorts them to do their own thing, and they are. I wonder how a teenage daughter would like living in the same bedroom as her folks. Not likely.
To be fair, they admit that this is a not-forever set up.
As an individuator, and as an American, I advocate living large, with a fine standard of living. There is no need for ostentation, greed, conspicuous consumption or waste, but a 2,000 square foot house is morally acceptable.
Individuators should work hard but live well and want not: that lifestyle affirms their dignity, increases their happiness, and reinforces their self-esteem. Living large is desirable and appropriate. Living huge is not.
The lifestyle of minimization that the couple adheres too is anti-humanistic. Human presence on earth should be prevalent and sometimes maximum. It is our destiny. It is what God want for us and our home planet.
No comments:
Post a Comment