Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

One Mind at a Time

The great question of our time is whether or not a powerful and wealthy republic can maintain itself in perpetuity or if it is doomed to collapse under its own weight. If it is doomed to collapse, whose fault is it?


As I’ve said before, we’re different than the rest of the world. The rest of the western, “democratic” world is moving to a democratic socialism (probably, in actual function, closer to Marx than the Declaration of Independence). These systems are tyrannies of the elite backed by the majority. Individual freedom is dying a slow death in Europe and now maybe in America.


Europe has come to believe the purpose of government is the preservation of the “community.” Don’t understand what that means? Let’s look at it in a microcosm, let’s look at Taxes.


In a community oriented view, citizens are obligated to pay taxes to government because it is in their common interest. It’s hard, at first glance, to argue with this logic. You want roads? You must pay taxes so government may build them. You want to make sure all children have a good education, you must contribute to public education.


The implication of such logic however is that individual liberties are subservient to the good of the society as a whole. Therefore governments are instituted among men (and women) for the benefit of the community and anything that threatens the supremacy of society should be destroyed.


What is it then that threatens society and its government? Anything that requires an allegiance to something other than the society or its representative government. Think that’s a stretch? Consider this: No one member of a committee (say 535 members of Congress) can be said to represent society, but collectively they form a body that does, by definition, represent the interests of society. They, under oath to serve and protect society, aggregately form a government.


In this case the name, government, is even more significant because it is a clear description of what this body does; it governs society. It disciplines appetites and desires, motivates, directs, and even controls society for its own benefit. It is the only single actor that can because it represents society in the aggregate.


Under such a paradigm, such a government’s power must be infinite. It must have the power to achieve its aims. It must have the coercive ability to herd the many felines of differing interests.


Europe has adopted such a worldview. Fine. Let them. They are willing to accept unemployment rates continually in double digits in exchange for public goods.


The current American administration holds that view. That is why President Obama admittedly and openly says he’s going to redistribute wealth to those who need it. It is why, he believes anybody making over $250,000 a year has an obligation to pay more than they do now. He’s willing to accept the consequences (higher unemployment, larger welfare bureaucracy, more government intrusion into the lives of every day citizens). I’m not.


The American Republic was built under the rubric of a very different paradigm. America’s constitution was built on the belief that society’s role is to protect the freedom of the individual. This world view holds that every individual (with obvious exceptions) is capable of being totally self sufficient. Given basic tranquility and blind law, every man (and woman) is capable of not only feeding themselves but of excelling in whatever field they desire.


This, of course, does not imply that all people born have the same abilities, or even the same opportunity to achieve. The human experience is replete with enough examples to prove that is not the case. But it does mean, given a framework (law) that is open to opportunity, everybody is better off left to succeed or fail based on their own merits.


Here, as with the reverse philosophy (and especially in a republic), government “represents” the people and makes decisions and institutes laws. But here, the goal of the government is not what is best for society, but rather what is best for the individual. If you take care of individual liberties and success, society will be taken care of by weight of all the individuals succeeding. (As opposed to the effort to ensure the success of some over others which is an oligarchy.)


But what of those that can’t you ask? In a highly successful and free society or nation, surplus is almost always available. A free people, successful and flush with the rewards of their hard labor do not feel threatened and therefore are willing to share with those “less fortunate” or less capable. (Hence the origin of the belief in a basic public safety net or a willingness to pay higher taxes to take care of the poor.)


Under such a view, the individual’s freedom is paramount because only when the individual feels free from threat will he be most willing to build or create, take risks and push the boundaries of what is possible. Thus government is limited and restricted (restrained by a list of “negative rights” as some immature critics have called it).


The reverse is also true. When an individual feels that all they have worked for can be taken away, they tend to hide and hoard their individual rewards. Hence they don’t build, they don’t invest, and they don’t create jobs.


Ironically enough, the only way a nation can shift between the two views and the resultant governments, is through an attitude shift of its populace (and, if you believe Thomas Jefferson, the natural elite). That is; the people must be willing to embrace the change a single individual at a time.


Who then is responsible for the shift in government’s focus seen over the last 100 years in America? You! In the end, it is we the people that will chose, one person at a time. It’s in your hands.

Thursday, April 30, 2009

I am American

“[Bradshaw had written:] The opposers of liberty have very little else to urge for themselves besides inconveniences. But the defenders of the magistrate’s power offer something more when they tell you that a man cannot part with his liberty and have it too, convey it by compact to the magistrate and retain it himself. ‘The first inconvenience is the impossibility to fix a point where the imposer will stop. For do but once grant that the magistrate hath a power to impose, and then we lie at his mercy how far he will go.’” – John Locke


An open letter to the President:

Mr. President;


I have been stunned at the power government now wields. Without reference to the Constitution, our government now tells private citizens how much they are allowed to earn, that any money over $250,000 earned in any year belongs to somebody else, and that the government itself knows how to run businesses better than its citizens.


Mr. President, I warn you that the policies you are pursuing do not lead to prosperity. We’ve been down this road before. Are you so young that you don’t remember the stagnating inflation of the late 1970’s and early 1980’s? Do you not remember the elite politicians of the age thinking they knew better than the American people? Government ownership of industries, interference in the economy, runaway deficits, and exorbitant taxes where the hallmarks of the era. You threaten to take us back in time.


Ronald Reagan spoke of it in his first inauguration: “From time to time, we have been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. But if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else?”


Mister President; I am fully aware that your administration orchestrated the bonus scandal at AIG, orchestrated a union take over of Chrysler, forced banks to accept federal loans and then changed the terms of those loans, and is now moving legislation that would institute government control over health care.


While I fully understand the collapse of the financial markets, I am aware that you have purposefully exacerbated public fears to justify the “remaking of America.” I know that your administration considers anyone who believes in smaller government an extremist and terror suspect.


I also understand that, without much effort, you could squash my future into dust. I know that you could and might be (by your recent interpretation of the Patriot Act) listening in on my conversations without a warrant.

But the one thing you are missing in all of this is that I’m an American and I can not be defeated. Americans aren’t stupid. We understand power better than you think. We don’t need you to save us from the economy; we’ve seen worse (no matter what doom and gloom you parley) in our history and overcame it. We can overcome this without you spending our children’s future.


You see what I understand and you don’t is that “We the People”, collectively are wiser and more capable than any one leader, no matter how gifted. I and my fellow American’s can not be defeated, only betrayed. We are a special people; the world’s last best hope for freedom and prosperity. We are the culmination of every society that has ever dared to dream of freedom.


Now I see you shaking your head. Yes it is true, I’m not black. I’m not a “minority” picked on and bullied for centuries by my fellow citizens. No, but like all other American’s I have seen injustices committed in this country and corrupt men break the rules and get a way with it. I was raised on stories of my religious forefathers receiving notice that the state governor had authorized their extermination, and I have known my fair share of disappointment. I have known little of easy breaks.


I have lived in former communist countries and seen grown men abandoned by society lying in their own urine. I have met women widowed because they crossed paths with dictators.


Oh, I am not naïve, I understand perfectly. That is why I recognize what you are doing. I ask you to turn back now before you betray our freedom any further. In the law we are free, in our freedom we are safe. I will take my chances with the vicissitudes of life, Mr. President, without your help, thank you. I will overcome because, I am American and that’s what we do.


Your Fellow Citizen,

DCM


“The crisis we are facing today does not require of us the kind of sacrifice that Martin Treptow (a soldier killed in WWI) and so many thousands of others were called upon to make. It does require, however, our best effort, and our willingness to believe in ourselves and to believe in our capacity to perform great deeds; to believe that together, with God’s help, we can and will resolve the problems which now confront us. And, after all, why shouldn’t we believe that? We are Americans.” – Ronald Reagan, First Inaugural Address