| |
03/20/10
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
March
03, 2008 One of the many oddities of American society, and one which goes back well before the War between the States, is that Americans seem all too often to regard government, at all levels, as selfless and benevolent. Indeed, for some people, government IS god; for others it is divinely inspired and endorsed. It is not uncommon to have government compared to Robin Hood, Santa Claus, and Johnny Appleseed all in one. We, as a nation, view government as savior, problem-solver, nanny, playground monitor, and a wealthy (if eccentric) aunt with one foot in the bucket, ready to shower us with an unexpected inheritance. As a result, we as a people, believe that government intervention in every aspect of life, public or private, is normal, required, and (at least usually) a good thing. Even many of those who are most opposed to government’s mistakes and attitude all too often seem to believe that if the “right judges” or the “right legislators” or the “right administrators” are elected or appointed, or if the “right” decisions are made by courts (based on the presentation of the “right” arguments), then government will become good. Looked at in another way, too many of us view government as a good thing turned evil, like Anakin Skywalker’s change into Darth Vader. So even if government intervention is (sometimes) a bad thing, we can fix government so that its intervention is always a good thing. However, history and logic show otherwise. Government, not even the American government - either of the Confederation or the Constitution - was not built to be a substitute parent, a loving caregiver, or a wise mentor. Attempts to portray it as something of this sort are either naïve or malicious; attempts to convert it to such are doomed. Government is force, its mechanisms are designed to apply that force as desired by those who control it. Its essence is disguised in order to make it more palatable. Today we speak of the “consent of the governed” the way people once spoke of the “divine right of kings.” Those who control the force which is government once claimed either to be divine themselves (such as Assyria, Egypt, early Roman Imperium) or to be divinely appointed (such as medieval kings and Chinese emperors). Since 1776, the powers that be claim to be “of, by, and for the people,” who are, of course divinely empowered to govern (“Vox Populi, Vox Dei” and “Under God the People Rule”). Thus, rituals to show divinity or divine favor are replaced by rituals to demonstrate popular support: demagogic appeals for support and votes (with other mechanisms to support and if necessary replace that should the appeals fail) are today’s replacement for drawing swords from stones and mythic genealogies and priestly proclamations and magic tricks. Obviously, force that would otherwise be immoral IS moral if employed by governments which are specifically directed by God to use that force. Intervention by government, on any scale, for any goal, is thereby legitimized. But who does control government? We are a “democracy,” we are told, and the people (empowered by God) rule. But facts show that concept is as mythical as the old ones of inherent divinity or divine right. And even if the people really did rule, what do we have? “Self interest” imposed from the outside is anything BUT self-interest, common interests cannot be imposed on a free people without taking away their freedom. For a truly free people, common interests develop out of shared but individual self-interest. Thus, democracy is really a farce, and government is controlled not by the people as a whole but rather by those who control the people, either directly or indirectly. The “people of the United States” are a mechanism of control and NOT the controllers. It is clear that force and demagogy combined can not counterfeit any concern for the personal interests of the average person, or indeed for anyone but those who control government. Yet we insist, as a people, that we are served better by this government making literally thousands of decisions for us, and pretend that it is in our own self-interest to do so! Free people do not necessarily understand what is in their best individual self-interest, but we have (or had) many people to turn to for advice and guidance: older family members, church leaders, educators, community “elders” and other experts. It was our choice to whom we listened. To a large degree, it was in the best interest of these various people to do and recommend things that were in the best interests of those who consulted them, and they were in competition with each other to serve those who sought them out. Today, perhaps more than at any other time since ancient Egypt or the era of the early “right-minded” Caliphs, these various sources have been co-opted or actually submerged into the apparatus of a multifaceted and nigh omnipresent government. Those who consult them (or any other element of government) are naïve indeed to believe that the advice they receive is going to be in the interest of anyone but the people who control that government. So it is foolish indeed to believe that any of us will fare better if we trade our own decisions, based on our self-interests, for decisions made by the minions of a demagogic and coercive system controlled by and operated for the benefit of others. Of course, there are those (indeed, most Americans) who believe that the “others” are the whole “people of the United States,” as we’ve discussed above. Let us, for now, ignore the point already made, that the people are really not in control. Perhaps “we the people” CAN get control, somehow. Are we now able to say that government intervention is in our own self-interest (or at least not AGAINST our self-interests)? No. History shows that this fond belief in democracy as good and perfectible is akin to the even more extreme myth that the principles of socialism will create a good society, if carried out properly. They are both myths. The hope of the American people is doomed, that hope that government can somehow be reformed, that Darth Vader can again be the good Anakin and a loving father for his children. Why? The answer is a seemingly-bizarre contradiction inherent in government. Government’s premise is that people, individuals, are not competent or able to run their own lives, or at least some part of those lives. Indeed, the fundamental theorem of government means that we are not competent even to choose who should advise us on those things which we are not competent to do for ourselves. Government has a way to decide for people what they are not competent to decide for themselves. This is for an “elite” to do, whether that elite consists of one person (a dictator, king, or emperor) or a group (oligarchy, nobility, theocracy, technocracy, etc.). This elite is selected in some way: by raw power exercised by that elite itself, by divine intervention (or the claim of such), or (in the case of “democracy”) by the people whom it is claimed have the inherent power (given by God) to rule. It is this last that concerns us in the United States today, and with the idea that democracy is perfectible. We assume that the same people whom, as a basic premise of government, are incapable of running their own lives (or even of hiring experts to help them run their lives), ARE capable of voting into power an elite group of experts who will be able to run their lives for them. How strange that those who reject any belief in the mystical powers of a box like the Ark of the Covenant are so willing to ascribe vastly more powerful magical ability to the ballot box. Equally strange is the belief that people whom it is claimed do not have the capability to understand and apply their own personal ideas and interests in the market, indeed, in everyday life, DO have the ability, collectively, to understand the complexities of their own lives, the lives of everyone in their community, and indeed, the affairs of an entire nation if not an entire planet, well enough to choose wisely the elite (a ruler or a political party or a Congress) that will run their lives and everyone else’s. Not only that, but what about the elite themselves? Under the basic premises of democracy, they too are not competent to run their own lives, and yet they are wise enough to run the lives of the entire city, county, state, or nation? Indeed, to the contrary, we see in history and today that while most people ARE indeed able to understand and make necessary decisions well enough to protect their own personal interests in the market, most of us cannot have either the knowledge or the skills to develop a praxeology necessary to reason even marginally adequately to control the actions of tens, much less hundreds, thousands, or millions of people. The common response to this is that collectively, people are wiser and more able to come to a good decision than individuals. Anyone who has watched a group of adults make a decision on what kind of pizza to order knows this for the bogus argument that it is. As I am fond of saying (perhaps too fond), you determine the IQ of a committee by taking the IQ of the smartest person on the committee and dividing by the number of people on the committee. History has shown that humans make poorer decisions collectively than individually. (Not that the track record for individual decisions is exactly good; truly Jeremiah 10:23 states, "O Jehovah, I know that the way of man is not in himself; it is not in man that walketh to direct his own steps.) With such a serious and irreparable contradiction, it is clear that government is not capable of intervening in any human activity with any good results. And the chances of reform to any significant degree are nil. Until we recognize this and take action appropriately, we are going to accomplish little.
Nathan Barton is writing this from a wonderful place in the West, which might be in the Black Hills of South Dakota or Wyoming, or might be in one of the Four Corners States. Exactly where it is, the breezes blow with the scent of liberty, and the sound of the pines or the pinions is the sound of freedom. For thousands of years, people have fought and died for the liberty that Americans in the great spaces of the West enjoy, and he writes these commentaries in the hopes that continued generations will be able to do so, until the end of Time. Visit the blog: The Gospel Sower |
What is a "person" In modern America? Libertarian Proposals For The Constitution (Part One) Libertarian Proposals For The Constitution (Part Two) Who is the enemy of free speech? Bumper Stickers - Fact and Fiction The Truth About Depleted Uranium Gun-Free and Proud: a new tactic for a new generation Palestinian Suicide Bomber - Fact or Myth? The First Great Railroad Fight of the 21st Century Counting Our Blessings On Liberty Day More Victims Disarmed By OSHA Regulation "Islamist Terrorism" and the US Role: a response to Ivan Eland Science and Economics Vs Green (And Other) Nonsense Bogus Cell Phone Fire Warning Email Armed and Ready To Defend - The Greater Love Complete Archives for Nathan Barton
| |||||||||||||
 |
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
