Throughout the entirety of history governments have sought to rule absolutely over their people whether by monarchy or by party rule. This is an obvious and necessary response. How best to protect yourself against an outside force but by unifying.
Take a single village in the midst of the wilderness,
say they are self-sufficient. They grow
their own crops, make their own clothes, cut trees for shelter and even take
what little metal they have to make for tools and weapons. If each family is left to themselves, they
will argue over small matters and the village will be torn. They need some judge at least to keep the
peace, someone impartial who can institute some law. At this stage they are safe from themselves
but who is the watcher to keep watch over marauding invaders. Even if such a watcher exists who will muster
the villagers to fight, who has trained them, who can lead them? A well trained village can possibly defend
against a band of marauders but not a coalition of tribes or an army. How can two dozen well-armed, well trained
men defend their village against a hundred or hundreds of Vikings? This means a fiefdom, or kingdom must arise.
Coalitions are notoriously week in dealing with coordinated attacks.
The arc of history is always towards big government
for the purpose of defense but big government gets confused and thinks it
exists for its own purpose, for the purpose of opulence of the state. Moreover, since the time of Plato’s Republic
government has sought to institute its citizens and make them vassals of the
state. Give them enough education but
not too much, enough vigor but not too much, a family but only subservient to
the state.
America was the first country to break this
model. A ragtag revolution orchestrated
by the rich elite who in times past would take a deal and sell out the people
either weren’t given the proper compensation or had some spirit. Benedict Arnold was not an abnormality but
the norm caught in a sea of change. I do
not wish to excuse his treachery, for he pretended to be revolutionary only to
return to the Crown. When America was
finally free of England and more importantly it’s taxes it could have very
easily chosen to become a monarchy of its own.
I do marvel at the story, however fabled, that George Washington was
offered the title of President for Life and chose to be cast to an elected term
office. The first words of the
constitution are, “We the people”. The
first ten amendments called the Bill of Rights gives rights to
individuals. Rights are by definition
those which we already have and government can only protect. We already have the right to speak, write,
worship as we wish, to travel and be secure and to pick up a weapon to defend
ourselves. Government, does not give us
as rights the entitlement to others property or service without just or unjust
compensation but only that to which we already are endowed by our creator. America was unique in that it sought not to
create an all-powerful government but one that could simply protect the country
at large from foreign invasion.
The major change happened seventy-five years later
when an industrial society clashed with an agricultural society. These two societies were at the fracturing
point when a leader decided to push them over the edge by enforcing a law
ending institutional slavery. The civil
war was not about slavery but about dominance, dominance of Washington over the
states. It has led to the ever declining
states’ rights. At the time it was necessary, if there was two America’s one
could be attacked and invaded and the other would stand idly by. Necessity forced unity’s hand. Again, in world war one and the depression
that followed we needed to unify. We
were forced out of necessity to grow Washington. Washington grew not just for defense but for
standards, and the growth of economy.
All good things, the department of Agriculture used to offer suggestions
for all farmers spreading the good practices of others but now offers handouts
not to grow crops. As an aside,
communication is the great advancer, a farmer’s family can live for many
generations on one plot of land never improving the crop or harvest. Out of many such lands only one in a dozen or
a gross might come up with a small improvement.
The more that improvement can be shared, measured and standardized can
all benefit. Again, this is what
government has the potential to do well.
It does not need to harbor a secret for its own capital
advancement. Let the reader not be
mistaken that I advocate government in all forms but government like all
entities has its place and if it does its job well it makes all better and if
it does its job poorly most suffer.
The great depression
led to the most sweeping socialism the county had known. Not shortly before, the federal reserve and
the income tax had been established, no coincidence of course. What better way to centralize government and
therefore money than a good old fashion crushing debt crisis? The country recovered and by World War II the
country was in full government debt fueled capitalistic swing. Every great invention for the next fifty
years came from that war. Truly the
greatest and most terrible war mankind had ever experienced.
Despite the
Orwellian scare of Big Brother, He turned out to be kinder and gentler. He
pushed us to stop smoking, recycle and use mass transportation. States were supposed to be independent if not
sovereign counterweights against the all imposing federal state. Chip by chip, they lost their prowess. Now, they can do little more than tax and
create imposing layers of bureaucracy.
Generally speaking, governors maintain the roads and regulate interstate
taxation. I can’t think of another
viable function of state government.
They doll out money to schools which they collect from taxes, similar to
the model for the rest of their functions.
Towns with mayors who used to do this job have disappeared and replaced
by townships who have “supervisors” who collect the garbage and perform other
mundane activities. Police are regulated
by the counties and their “executives”.
Rampant inflation is given euphemistic names like quantitative
easing. Our recorded inflation is close
to zero but taxes, medical, food, fuel and any service that requires human
labor increases by ten percent a year.
On the plus side we can buy a plethora of electronic gaming devices for
the same price today as twenty years ago not indexed for inflation. This, the experts say offsets real inflation
as though you could eat your ipad.
Our economy is not
bad though. Highly skilled workers have
and continue to do well to provide for themselves. Money changers, I mean bankers, continue to
do outstandingly well. Low skilled
entrepreneurs also do well, those owning small shops or trucks that sell food
and sweets. Medium and low skilled
workers have it difficult. The
government likewise has been ‘compelled’ to help. Programs that were meant to provide an extra
“supplemental” bit of food to extremely impoverished families now provide a
generous amount to 20% of all US households.
Still, it is not enough to cover the entire food bill so the indignant
protest. The most laughable thing is the
call for a living wage. Everyone should
have a living wage by earning it. Paying
someone more than the labor they deserve means someone else must get less, and
the accountant in the middle will always take a cut. Then, as in all economic systems inflation
will rebalance the equation and the low skilled workers at the bottom with the
false sense of security will again scream for more. Fair or not fair, right or wrong but in every
case government grows. Our economy has a
GDP of 14 trillion dollars, a federal budget of 4 trillion and if you add up
all the state budgets I would assume another 2-3 trillion. Then throw in all the top corporations and
you have an economy which is 60 to 70 percent controlled by just 1-2 % of the
country. It might at this point sound
like I am advocating a group like we are the 99% but I am not. Those groups ARE the 1% because they all call
for bigger government.
Shocking changes to
the government would not make things better so the only way to go is bigger and
more expansive government. It’s coming
to the point and will come to the point where there is no where left to
grow. You can’t have a federal
government control 80% of all commerce because then you have straight
communism. I might be wrong about that
number, maybe it’s 75%, maybe 85% but at some point there is no more
economy. Like in Venezuela which was
only surviving due to high oil prices.
When the prices collapsed so did the society. What we have is a list of bad choices. From bad to worse, shrink the government
which is painful to everyone and usually is not followed until conclusion like
staying on a diet. Second and much worse
would be slashing government down to the proper size quickly. It could be carried out without losing focus
but would be extremely disruptive.
Thirdly, let government grow until it is a defacto socialistic
state. That is the easiest and the
deadliest choice. I suppose conquering
foreign lands would be an option but we don’t have the stomach for it. If we were to say (and I’m not advocating this)
take over Mexico and Canada we would grow our assets faster than our
budget. Again, this would be a communist
move because that’s how communism survives, by spreading.
There is another way to go which is even worse than
the current litany of bad choices. We
could push the globalist agenda. It
starts from the noble cause of a more connected and interconnected world. A
global economy that can produce and design anywhere and everywhere supposedly
benefiting everyone. Whether the merits
of free trade are more beneficial to the wealthy nations or to the poor I leave
for another article to dive into. What
comes beyond that which we have already seen is corporations without borders,
and states without sovereignty. Internationalist
groups and terrorist groups cross borders as they please. Proper nations control less than they
think. Their leaders can be influenced
with money, their elections manipulated by out of state entities. People of the world so to speak. This is the moment at which we are at where
the leaders of our country influenced by foreign funded groups try to push
elections in other countries towards desired paths. Who’s desired path? The people of that country, the people of our
country, the leaders of our countries or the special interests who have power
and influence over our leaders while holding allegiance to no one?
Finally, what comes at the end is a one world
government. It doesn’t need armies if it
can use countries armies as its tentacles.
It doesn’t need currencies if there is only one. Is a one world government a good thing or a
bad thing. Well, that depends. If there were other planetary systems with
strong economies and powerful militaries then like the village in the beginning
of the story we would need to unite to stand up for Earth’s common good. But without an external threat any world
governing body will naturally become corrupt and bloated and
counterproductive.
Here comes the new world order, same as the old world
order.
