A couple of really close friends of mine, who are part of my daily email ‘clang’ and exchange thoughts, ideas and news with me, developed this meme. Friend #1 engineered the bulk of it in response to a liberal he’s known since childhood, who posted the artwork with the ‘Progress-O-Bot’ equality of outcome motif. Friend #2 added the response item you see listed as #3 Statism.
Between the two of them, I was so knocked out that I felt I’d be selfish if I didn’t give you the chance to COL (Chuckle Out Loud) like I did. Brilliant stuff. About as close to an attribution from them as I can give you is the nom de plume ‘Foolbusters’.
Enjoy! – RC
#1) Christianity / Conservatism / Constitutionalist: The tallest boy, on his own accord and out of the charitable goodness of his heart, without external coercion and therefore making it a gift of greater value, will volunteer his own box so the shortest one can see and also enjoy.
#2) Liberalism: An external third party, such as the Government, will coercively FORCE the tallest one to give up what he has and redistribute it, essentially, stealing what is not theirs and giving to others.
#3) Statism (slight variant of Socialism /Liberalism): The government takes money and property from the tall and medium boy and uses it to build a higher fence, investing in infrastructure while feeding the short boy so that he will expand horizontally. Now all 3 are equal as none can see over it and Moochele now has to convince the short boy to go on a diet.
#4) Marxism: In addition to having his box forcebly taken away from him, the tallest boy would have his feet sawed off so that he would be below the fence’s top seeing nothing, just where the disadvantaged boy started out. Ah. Perfect equality of outcome!
Conservative Deductive Reasoning: Isn’t it possible to interpret from the drawing that the tallest boy might have been told from a very early age to eat every vegetable on his plate and also exercise – and he did so; and likewise the smallest boy counseled the same, yet he (the smallest boy) was so finicky, disobediently turning down all vegetables and otherwise avoided sports despite parental admonishing and accordingly stunted his own growth due to his own foolish free-will choices.
Conclusion: Why should someone who practiced wisdom and effort be penalized in favor of someone who was lazy or rebellious or did not listen to good advice? That’s two ways I looked at this work. (By the way, there are parables in the New Testament along these lines; the more conscientious and diligent servant being rewarded even greater when the master returned, and the lazy servant having what little he had, taken from him or otherwise scolded by the master).”