With all the "Change" in Washington and the hysterical demands for "more government regulations, more burdens on the private sector and more government interference in our private lives" its time to reconsider the direction we are headed in.
Whether you believe it is a "Marxist" form or "European" style of socialism, clearly the US government has moved toward more direct control and interference in both the private sector and in our private lives.
You don't believe it? Can't believe it? Think it is propaganda? Consider this recent commentary published in Pravda of all places:
"It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people."
Here is the link for the entire article: http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-0/
What's at stake?
Our freedom and our liberty.
Those that argue that only government has the ability and resources to fix the current problems and stabilize the economy are at best only partially right. Legitimate arguments have clearly been made demonstrating the role of politics, politicians and government interference in the recent economic calamity.
Of course there's plenty of blame to go around and depending on your political affiliation and personal philosophy (and family of origin issues I might add:) you'll assign this blame accordingly.
What we have here is a failure to communicate!
Someone has screwed up big time.
Whether you believe its the Republicans fault, the Democrats, the Federal Reserve, Greedy corporations, DC, Wall Street...all of the above, aliens, or whom ever else you choose to assign blame to, it is human nature to blame someone or something when the proverbial "poop" hits the fan.
Clearly there was a systemic breakdown as the risk grew. Financial instruments involving repackaged mortgages became increasingly more risky.
Complex risk assessments gave a false sense of control. Greed was steering the ship. The Emperor had new clothes and no one thought to take a closer look. Well, actually there were plenty of warnings from some very bright people, but alas it was to no avail. This ship of greed was destined to sail on until the inevitable "rock bottom" was hit.
Did the unexpected happened?
Yes it did. Few, if any risk assessment models considered the possibility of catastrophic failures in the continually repackaged mortgage markets. They were derived and re-derived, continually pushing the "risk" just over the event horizon. Then the "housing bubble" burst and we were in for the worst.
The "Poop" hit the fan and the blame game took off and is now in full gallop.
What ever comes of this current hunt for the "bad guys", however they are held "accountable" one thing seems clear; We are right on the hairy edge of fascism. From a superficial view point its easy and convenient to assign the cause of the troubles to unregulated greed on Wall Street. And its even easier to blame Bush and the Republicans. Easy. Convenient.
Especially so when you now have all the power concentrated in one party and "that" my fellow truth seekers is the "rub" as Shakespeare would say.
The cabal of power in Washington now believes it has a "Mandate" to change the fundamental architecture of liberty and freedom, our US Constitution.
Not change by amendment as is actually prescribed in the Constitution, Article 5 but change by informal methods that are as powerful and pervasive as the formal amendment process itself without all the hurdles to doing so.
Article 5 of the US Constitution states:
"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate."
Amending the Constitution is an arduous process.
There are less onerous methods to achieve the same result. Better to take the path of least resistance. Amend by changing its meaning, by reinterpreting it.
Judicial reinterpretation.
This now seems to be the preferred means to circumvent Article 5. This judicial slight of hand and the self-proclaimed mandate to reengineer the USA will be used to remake America into something deemed more "equitable" by redistributing its wealth and power.
The question of the day is:
"To whom shall this wealth and power be redistributed too?"
Judicial activism has become a means to circumvent the vote and the will of the people to promote social change and "equality." No need to enact a law when you can conveniently reinvent it by reinterpretation of the "meaning" of existing laws. The balance of governmental powers is now doubtful. It can only mean more "forced changes" for "our own good and the good of the country."
Another means of "informal constitutional change" is through the process of cultural change and circumstance. One example is the evolution of voting rights. The original language reserved the right to vote to only male monied land holders. Of course voting rights have now been extended to all citizens 18+. The Constitution was never formally amended to reflect this change. Yet it is now part of the status quo and considered a fundamental right. Not a bad thing of course. The danger lies in the erosion of the two party system and the loss of the one party to limit the power of the other.
The changes in our culture and the presumed "mandate for change" will push this informal process of "constitutional" change even further. Though this informal process of constitutional change has become part and parcel to the "warp and woof" of the American political system it can become a tool for reducing our liberty as well.
Mix together politics, politicians, politically appointed judges and a filibuster proof congress and voila, you have a recipe for fascism. I am shaken and stirred by the possible consequences of one political party holding all the cards. Now the change game has no oversight, no brakes to slow down the runaway power grab. The possibility of a new kind of fascism is disturbing to say the least.
Regardless of your political affiliation everyone should be deeply concerned.
This supposed "mandate for change" is on the path to becoming deterministic. The attitude is parochial. The unspoken voice of a determined invisible parent "who "knows what best for you." "Be a good citizen!" "Do what we tell you do, ITS FOR YOUR OWN GOOD -- or else!!!"
Or else what? Reeducation camps? Prison? Be called a hater, a racist, a xenophobe? Be marginalized for voicing your opinion?
I am not opposed to "change." It is essential for growth, for renewal and for the health of our society.
What I am opposed to is having "change" force fed to me.
What I am opposed to is being told that "they" know what's better for me.
Well guess what? "They" don't know better than me what's best for me. Shocking Y'all?:)
Good. I'm a free thinker not a puppet of the State or a hack for a political party. I can think, choose and decide for myself. Thank you very much.
So I have a few "changes" myself I would like to propose:
1. People should be free to do what they want. All things considered:)
2. People should be able to opt out of any undesirable arrangement if they so choose to do so.
3. Our liberty should be preserved by the actions of our government. Mandates, regulations and other forms of forced behavioral changes should be kept to the bare minimum.
4. Government should always seek to preserve our liberty yet enact legislation that encourages our choice in such ways will improve our lives.
If there is a mandate, let it be this; the government as protector of freedom and architects of choice should do everything they can to preserve freedom of choice while "nudging" us in directions that will improve our lives.
Let us help those who need help but let us do it as a matter of choice not force or mandate.
Excellent article. I couldn't agree more with your assessment that we're on the "hairy edge of facism". imho, the country has been softened up for this day for many decades. A generation at a time, the great American experiment in freedom and individual liberty has been morphed into a confused belief that more government equals greater freedom.
ReplyDeleteMost of today's young people have been led to believe that we must fear and loathe corporations whose power (and very limited power at that) comes from money earned by selling products and services to willing buyers. These same young people have no understanding or concern about a government growing in leaps and bounds, and preparing to control or greatly influence virtually everything we value in our lives, with the power to destroy individuals at its whim.
As grim as I think our current circumstance is due to factors you mention in your article, I do see some rays of hope. Ron Paul, an aging and squeeky-voiced congressman from Texas seemed to cut through the leftist propaganda to reach young people in surprisingly large numbers, although I don't know if it was his message of individual freedom or his anti-war stance that gained him the most support. I also find hope in the tremendous advancements in science and technology which will come at an ever-faster pace in the years ahead. My hope is that these advancements will allow us to improve our lives in the future in spite of the horrendous economic policies and regulations the Democrats are in the process of signing into law.
Oh, that's how things are across the pond. Good conclusion, nice of you to bother defending the freedom of Peoples.
ReplyDeleteFreedom to spend their own money would be good too. Oh, and while I'm here,, I must add, freedom to take up a clod of soil to build our own shacks and houses.