"Social understandings about citizens’ relationship with each other and their government depended on a norm of shared sacrifice, formed during the Great Depression and World War Two, until the late Seventies. Since then corporatists and racists have successfully promoted aggregating self-interested choices by individuals as a way of organizing society.
This has left the US populated by a citizenry that resists collective action of almost every kind that does not personally enrich them as individuals, depends on consumerism to support its economy, and divides us according to our lifestyle preferences.
Very few Americans can reasonably discuss necessary limitations on their self-interested choices, and this is indeed very sad."
- R. Stanton Scott
According to Stan the relationship between citizens and government has moved from one of "shared sacrifice" to one where citizens resist collectivism in favor of rational self-interest. Somehow this is a bad thing because we don't want to discuss "necessary limitations" on our personal choices?
If you've ever wondered why collectivism is entirely incompatible with individualism and individual liberty Stan's comment should make it clear for you. Basically, authoritarian collectivists like Stan are Sad Panda's because Americans (at least some of us) value our freedoms and don't like being told what to do by some elitist overlord.
I for one am quite happy to see Stan sad.