Cogitations — Part 1
No government is your friend. Government has always thrived when a large number of fools blindly support and put their collective faiths into it. Blind faith meets EVERY governments prime goal of ensuring that, as an enterprise, it is perceived as being vital for its citizens’ hopes of achieving a great, peaceful, and safe life. EVERY government throughout time has chosen, and subsequently dangled grand concepts such as Royalty [For The King], Strength [The Thousand Year Reich], Success [Roma Victor], Religion [We Are Chosen] and Freedom [Land Of The Free], in front of its people in order to explain why they are different, and somehow better, than the rest.
Just like that friendly dog that lives down the street, government nearly always snaps at the hands of those who reach into its food bowl. George Washington (America’s Highest Ranking General and Prime President) was quoted as saying that government “is a dangerous servant and a fearful master”. In this sense, and despite their best intentions, ALL governments have been equals. Equally arrogant and equally troublesome! The unfortunate truth is that ZERO good can come from individuals placing their faith into any government. Those who willingly surrender their privileges to any entity that has power over them, are either ignorant, blind, or sinister.
Ignorant because they have not learned from history and they actually believe government is there to help them. Of course, when constrained, government has its limited role; however, when government is not constrained, you get the socialists who cheered the rise of Mussolini, the Germans who stood by as the Nazi’s seized power, or the communists who dove headfirst into the bonds of the USSR. If you want to determine if you are amongst the Ignorant, ask yourself if you believe that people have too much freedom. Ask yourself if you believe that government must ensure that people do not take advantage of their own freedoms or get their freedoms taken advantage of by others. If you put that much faith into government, you are the Ignorant.
The Ignorant believe that government should (or can) help those who have little, without adversely affecting those who have more. They don’t accept the premise that nothing comes for free. Not Social Security; and not Healthcare. It is ALWAYS the entrepreneurs, innovators, creators, and risk-takers that are appointed the responsibility to pay when government wants something but needs more money to achieve it. The Ignorant feel that government is necessary to ensure “fairness”, or to “take care of the poor” and governments condition their people to believe this because government benefits from such ignorance. Government cannot, however, argue with time tested truth and history, noting that if you — Identify the governments that have the most power over the people in their country, you’ll identify the poorest people.
Blind because they choose to ignore what government tells them is its actual goal. That goal is: To grow and increase government size, power, and scope. Governments ALWAYS believe their country would be better if government only had more control in order to “manage” its citizens and their behaviors. The irony is that governmental management WILL NEVER WORK because government cannot manage the goals, expectations, motivations, talents, dreams, skills, or efforts of any one individual, let alone millions of individuals in a single society. Government is so arrogant that it refuses to accept that it will never be able to manage society so instead, it attempts to add more regulations in a vicious cycle to achieve its silly management notions. This is exactly why on 1 January 2012, nearly 40,000 U.S. laws went into effect. You can — review the governments that secured the most management power over their people and note how severely their societies collapsed. Compare East Germany to West Germany. Compare North Korea to South Korea. Initially they were the same peoples with shared cultures, a shared language, and yet, one fails miserably. And it is the one that was less free and had more control over its people.
Name a free Country that has collapsed. This is because governmental management is not possible and although a government such as North Korea’s may survive through force over an unarmed population, it is delusional. North Korea provides nothing to the world, its people provide nothing to its society, it has zero innovation, only politicians and top military live well, and it cannot even “manage” to feed its people. It is a welfare state supported by other nations of the world. If governmental management was so effective, wouldn’t North Korea be strong? Wouldn’t communist Russia (Under Stalin), communist China (Under Mao), Cuba, Iran, Syria, Libya, Mugabe’s Zimbabwe, or any number of totalitarian governments have been resoundingly successful? What evidence does any government cite that leads it to believe management, control, and regulation is the way to go? Or is it merely, like the dog behind the fence, following its own nature?
…and then there’s the;
Sinister because they think they can work with, and through government to achieve their personal goals and interests in spite of the personal goals and interests of others. The Sinister amongst us selfishly feel that the input of others is less valuable than that of themselves. The Sinister will not accept the freedoms of others to do what they choose whilst expecting other to accept their freedoms. Instead of a bar owner allowing smoking in his own business, the Sinister create laws that NO ONE should have smoking in any bar. On a Federal level, Imagine attempting to ban all Alcohol because you think the country would be better without it (Prohibition)? Instead of leaving others alone, the sinister feel that they should direct others by taking away opportunity and options they deem faulty, and they codify it in laws.
The sinister also ask for government to interject its power when they are not able to convince people of the value of their ideas. What is it, if not sinister, for government to use taxpayer money to fund “Green” energy, to own real estate lenders, or to bail-out failing auto companies? Not that it seems to matter, but just where does the Federal government get this responsibility? The Sinister relegate the rule-of-law to a mere inconvenience unless it benefits them. As an example, the sinister readily justify Freedom Of Speech as a reason why they should be allowed to protest on government property, but they suggest that others do not have that same Freedom Of Speech when they want to pray on the very same government property?
Life and individual freedom is about putting personal interests (one’s family, one’s job, one’s efforts, one’s finances, one’s survival) above the interests of others. Inherent within the concept of individual freedom, is the freedom to succeed and the freedom to fail. Government cannot mandate that everyone succeed; but it can ensure that more people fail merely by corrupting their individual freedoms.
There is a rule-of-law that states what government can and cannot do. Unfortunately, that rule-of-law is “defended” by people who have their own personal interests, goals, and motivations. Many of these defenders are called government employees, and still others are called politicians. Employees and politicians make up government, conversely, they are a threat to the individual freedom of those who are not part of government! Many of these government jobs are to come up with ways government can do its job “better”. For government, “better” usually involves intervention in the decisions and choices of people who did NOT ask for the government’s opinion. They call it regulation and it is not voted on by the people, nor is the vast majority approved by Congress.
Individual freedoms are merely cast aside by government through the creation of laws written by government employees or sponsored by politicians. It should be telling that as these rules become the law of the land, the input of the people is wholly disregarded. It is ironic to note that although government touts that it is doing the will of the people, government disregards that same will of the people when the people want the government to STOP. Look no further than the unpopular government actions on national healthcare, corporate bailouts, increasing national debt limits, or the growth of regulatory bodies.
In The End?
The Ignorant may learn new information and thus, will no longer continue to be Ignorant. The blind may utilize new information, see a new truth about their government, and cease to be blind. But the Sinister become consigned in the idea that they are right, and invariably, they choose not to change their minds. The Sinister merely want what they want despite any laws to the contrary. The Ignorant, Blind, and the Sinister should comprehend that government may not intend to make them slaves, but the outcome will certainly end in slavery. The Ignorant, Blind, and Sinister (or their offspring) will likely die in shackles as they slowly realize that for nearly everything THEY choose to do with their own lives and their own property, that government will require they meet numerous regulations, laws, fees, and licensing requirements. Is this freedom?
While talking to a person whom I greatly respect about the government ban on incandescent light bulbs, they noted that they were OK with the ban because they don’t use incandescent bulbs anymore. I noted that I don’t use many incandescent bulbs either, but I came to another conclusion. That “choosing” to use incandescent bulbs is a freedom that has been removed by Federal government regulation. If a government (or anyone) took away that right, then that government (or anyone) is taking away your freedom to choose a light bulb. But exactly when did it become the responsibility of the Federal government to ban items that do not hurt anyone? Most of us can understand regulating certain kinds of firearms, explosives, chemicals, or other hazardous items, however, when did private electrical “efficiency” become any of the Federal government’s authority? Is this what an American Government does, or is this what a King proclaims?
The fact is that despite any good intention; the type of light bulbs free people buy… is NOT a Federal responsibility so long as it doesn’t harm anyone. It is NOT in the Constitution and this ban is NOT supported by the 10th Amendment. I’ll ask again; Is this freedom? The Federal government has told everyone that they cannot use regular light bulbs but must buy bulbs such as Compact Fluorescent that contain mercury (which is actually hazardous to human health). It should be obvious, that government is willing to disregard individual freedoms, and it will soon find another product to ban, and the process to ban that next product will be easier and faster than the light bulb as there is now established precedent. If government can ban a light bulb due to its power usage, then government can also ban TV’s that it deems too large. It can also then mandate that everyone must buy solar panels, tank-less water heaters, or even, regulate that ALL cars and trucks get 20 miles per gallon, or be banned?
Maurice Ogden wrote a poem called The Hangman that seems perfectly apt for our present threat. Ogden’s message speaks to those who do nothing as injustices occur by governments. These injustices can extend to the seizure of “rights” and “freedoms”. The story is from the perspective of an individual as he stands by and witness’ a Hangman lynch group after group. Initially, no one does anything because they are not part of the group being attacked and they want to believe the hangman will spare their lives if they stay silent. Instead, the hangman moves on to another group; and then he chooses another; and then yet another. Eventually, the storyteller realizes the hangman is coming for him; and there is no one left to stand with him against the hangman.
Ogden symbolically places the hangman on the courthouse square to represent government as the aggressor. The hangman does not do anything that the people did not allow him to do and yet, everyone is lynched. Inalienable rights are those that government has no power to infringe upon. There is no confusion and the government understands its limitations, it just chooses to disregard limitations on its power. As an example, the Bill Of Rights was meant to protect Americans against unreasonable search and seizure, however, not even The Bill Of Rights stops the Federal government from attacking privacy with laws such as the PATRIOT Act that allow warrantless searches, holding suspects indefinitely, and investigation of citizens who are NOT officially under investigation. Ironically, many people are staying silent because they are not part of the group being attacked. But rest assured, Government Is Your Hangman!
The Experiment WAS the United States. Could a government respect the individual rights of a free people without eventually making them servants to distant government entities that force them to pay for items they do not use, do not approve of, nor do not want? The experiment was whether government can respect the individual, his goals, her freedoms, his privacy, her ideals, and their inclinations to stay away from government! Could Government Be Constrained So It Can Not Seize Individual Rights? Rights-be-damned as government feels it can make any directive, or overcome any individuals’ liberties so long as it has the votes to approve a “law”. The Experiment Has Been A Monumental Failure!
— Imagine that world in which a far-away government can force you to buy products or services you don’t — for whatever reason — want, choose to have, or can afford. Imagine if government could then penalize you for not buying what they tell you to buy and regulate your life without any input from you. Would this be a free country?
— Imagine being a colony that fought against your colonial tyrant because he was raping you of your money and resources through excessive taxation, or by seizing your property and real estate merely because he wanted it. Would you be in a free country if your NEW government could take the same actions your colonial tyrant did?
In his Gettysburg Address, Abraham Lincoln spoke about a government, “Of the people, By the people, For the people”. Unfortunately, this concept has been whittled down through constant attack on the rule-of-law. The only entity that has benefited from this erosion; is government. It has cancerously grown larger, consumes more resources, collects more tax money, has more power over the free market, has more regulatory agencies, has more control over how people spend their own money, has more laws, bans harmless products, funds private companies, and on-and-on-and-on. Currently, the Federal government is NOT by or for the people. It is by itself, for itself and it does exactly what America’s colonial rulers did [that eventually led to a revolutionary war].
Due to the 17th Amendment, Senators were no longer appointed by State Legislatures. Congress is a Federal Entity. Representatives and Senators get Federal paychecks, and they receive Federal retirement plans. Despite being elected by State citizens, Congressmen are Feds that are elected to represent those States in our representative republic (not democracy). Once elected, they sit in Washington D.C. and vote on laws contrary to what the people they represent want. There can be little doubt, that Congressmen do what they must to keep their Federal jobs, and keep those who sign their paychecks (the Federal Government) happy. They blame the system but they ARE the system; and they will do what they must in order to maintain their positions and to increase their own self-serving benefits (such as approving their own pay raises and opposing Congressional term limits). Is this Of, For, and By the People? Or is this, Taxation Without Representation?
It ALWAYS Collapses
There are numerous absolute certainties all governments’ share as a matter of definition. This is regardless of whether you’re speaking of monarchy, oligarchy, communism, socialism, or experimental governments. Two of these absolutes are that, (1) it is absolutely certain that, over time, EVERY government will consolidate more power for itself; secondly (2), it is absolutely certain that over time, all governments’ will eventually come to an end. For proof of these two certainties ask yourself for examples of exception. Name a government (just one) that has not grown more powerful – until it was deemed the enemy by those it governed? And then, name a government that, over time, has not come to an end? Nothing — not even galaxies — last forever and the US Government cannot be different. The hope was that a free people, in a free country, with inalienable rights, could survive without being consumed by their government because it did not have the power to seize those inalienable rights. Apparently, we will NEVER know!
Every government INITIALLY attempts to garner the favor of the people within its borders. It is only when they cannot convince, that they move to coerce. Government attempts to coerce its citizens by telling them it must be aggressive in order to protect, them. Unfortunately, through the process of coercion, government must wrestle ever more control from the citizenry to better manage new threats that arise due to its previous efforts at coercion. The Ignorant, The Blind, and The Sinister will faithfully sit back and accept government attempts as necessary and only when they realize that they are afraid of the government will they epiphanize that they foolishly and voluntarily surrendered their own rights and freedoms away. Government will ask for your service and it will ask for your sacrifice. But recall that it was Ayn Rand who wrote:
“It only stands to reason that where there’s sacrifice, there’s someone collecting the sacrificial offerings. Where there’s service, there is someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters, and intends to be the master.”
Government’s nature is not to be respectful, nor to be friendly. It WILL, however, consume right-after-right, and freedom-after-freedom if left to its own devices. This is because… government intends to be the master.
Other political articles of interest: