Why Politics is Pointless

[Francisco Ferrer]

So the thing is to forget human nature and only think about elites.

Why am I not surprised?

And what a great example of human nature.

Michael

Who said anything about forgetting? There is no dichotomy between understanding human nature and recognizing the key role that special interests have played in the growth of government.

It was not by accident that the last Republican president bailed out Bear Stearns, let Lehman Brothers die, but then threw Goldman Sachs a lifeline. Nor was it by accident that his Democratic successor helped bail out the auto industry and the labor unions that support him.

[moralist]

There's an interesting idea floating around on this thread: that harm only comes to those who are immoral or who allow themselves to be harmed.

Did you know that the government is subject to all of the same moral laws that you are? So if you want to be treated like a decent person by the government (or anyone else for that matter)...

...first become one, and you will.

Let's set this theory next to two examples from history...

Sorry, Frank... let's get this straight right from the get go so as to save a lot of back and forth. I'm not talking about the dead past. I'm talking about right now and right here in America... which is a unique nation in that it was founded upon Judeo/Christian moral values. So the US government is subject to all of the same moral laws that you are. What you truly are inside is sole determinant of how you're treated by government.

It's my opinion that people who regard themselves to be helpless innocent victims of US government "oppression" are lying to themselves. Their blame of government is unjust because they are the ones who created the government in their own image. And as their creation, it can only represent the same values by which they live. It is peoples' own failure to do what's morally right that grants the government their sanction to become a victim of it's intrusion into their poorly ordered life.

Greg

Let's talk about current history, if you wish.

If the federal government was "founded upon Judeo/Christian moral values" and "is subject to all of the same moral laws" that I am, then why have there been no negative consequences for IRS agents who seize other people's property,

That would all depend on the reason why it is "seized". Property routinely goes up for public auction when the owners fail to pay property taxes on it.

while at the same time petty thieves are jailed all the time?

That's because it's morally wrong to take from others what does not rightfully belong to you.

When does the subjection to moral laws begin for DC's legalized thieves?

Everyone pays for what they do here. You just don't always see it.

If I am the "sole determinant of how [i am] treated by government," then why didn't the IRS stop collecting a portion of my income years ago?

Or does the IRS only collect from evil people? If so, what evil did I commit that qualifies me for punishment?

We each have a very different view on this. You believe that you should be able to enjoy living in America without paying any taxes, and I don't.

Since I didn't vote for Obama or any person who enacted his Affordable Healthcare Act, how in the world is the federally managed medical industry a creation of my own image?

I didn't vote for Obama either... and right now there's a lot of people who are regretting that they did!

People demanded the government to serve them and make them feel safe and secure and "cared for" by indemnifying them against every possible contingency known to man... and all at the expense of someone else... and now they're getting exactly the government they deserve shoved right up their asses.

But even though the government does not represent me I'm not treated unfairly. I turned down everything the government offered to me because I neither needed nor wanted it, because I understand the strings attached to everything. It's a trap... so I simply avoid it.

And because I have basically nothing to do with the government or with what it only appears to offer, the government basically leaves me alone to do as I see fit... to enjoy my life and my liberty to pursue my own happiness. Why? Because those rights do not come from the government. The come from God. But there's a condition... decency. No one who fails to live a life deserving of those God given rights will ever enjoy them.

Since I don't rob people, how can it be said that the government "represent the same values by which" I live?

Your own experience of getting the government you deserve is directly connected to the values by which you are living. And by moral law, you can only be robbed as you rob others. So I'm suggesting to you that it is a matter of your own perception. Everyone's experience of getting the government they deserve is different, because everyone lives by different values.

I have no complaints with how the government treats me. I don't rob others, and the government doesn't rob me. The government treats me exactly as decent as I am. And I'm suggesting to you that if you were to take another look, you just might discover that it does exactly the same to you.

Greg

[Jules Troy]

I kinda think that for money paid in taxes I have not received fair value.

70-80k in taxes every year for the last ten years all going to worthless dregs of welfare who in turn vote themselves more of the same.

Voting has become the practice of who in power will steal the most for the have nots. The have nots numbers are swelling all clamouring at the trough for the government to carve them a bigger slice off the carcass that was once a great big living thing.

Now it is barely breathing.

[moralist]

Ayn Rand on faith:

But in order to fight, you must understand. You must know exactly what you believe and you must hold to your faith honestly, consistently, and all the time. A faith assumed occasionally, like Sunday clothes, is of no value. Communism and Nazism are a faith. Yours must be as strong and clear as theirs. They know what they want. We don't. But let us see how, before it is too late, whether we have a faith, what it is and how we can fight for it.

How's them apples? Ayn Rand saying you have to hold on to your faith.

This is what I love about Ayn Rand.

She held the ideal of a 24 karat gold man, and not just a gold plated man. When you scratch a 24 karat man he's all the same, all the way through, from top to bottom, from the inside to the outside.

In my opinion, the reason she had a bone to pick with religion because she could see the brass underneath the gold plating of so many who were acting under the color of religious authority. The sin of doing evil in the name of God is grievous enough to make the Top Ten.

"Thou shalt not carry the banner of the Lord falsely."

Greg

[Selene]

I kinda think that for money paid in taxes I have not received fair value.

70-80k in taxes every year for the last ten years all going to worthless dregs of welfare who in turn vote themselves more of the same.

Voting has become the practice of who in power will steal the most for the have nots. The have nots numbers are swelling all clamouring at the trough for the government to carve them a bigger slice off the carcass that was once a great big living thing.

Now it is barely breathing.

Jules:

Don't you live in Canada?

A...

[moralist]

I kinda think that for money paid in taxes I have not received fair value.

Well, that's where we differ in our perceptions. I do. Are you an employee? That could account for our difference in views.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

Greg seems to be a render unto (God/Ceasar) man.

--Brant

I say render up Caesar

[moralist]

Greg seems to be a render unto (God/Ceasar) man.

Yes, I am.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

Greg seems to be a render unto (God/Ceasar) man.

Yes, I am.

Greg

So if it's against the law you call the cops no matter the nature of the offense? For instance, you know your neighbor or friend cheats on his taxes and after informing the IRS he goes to prison, has all his property confiscated and you get a nice reward check from Leviathan.

--Brant

I can come up with more extreme or less extreme examples--for instance, German Jews under Hitler or a kid smoking marijuana

God/Caesar is merely a way of sanctioning state power usually in return for state maintenance of a monoploy religion

rendering onto Caesar enables Caesar to render up you and, in turn--in that context--you keep Caesar at bay with sundry bribes, including the bribes of obedience and sanction and taxes and under-the-table payoffs to bag men

[Francisco Ferrer]

Let's talk about current history, if you wish.

If the federal government was "founded upon Judeo/Christian moral values" and "is subject to all of the same moral laws" that I am, then why have there been no negative consequences for IRS agents who seize other people's property,

That would all depend on the reason why it is "seized". Property routinely goes up for public auction when the owners fail to pay property taxes on it.

Property that is seized for non-payment of taxes is stolen property, just as taxes themselves are a form of theft. Stealing is a violation of the Ten Commandments, an essential part of the "Judeo/Christian moral values" that you think this country was founded upon.

while at the same time petty thieves are jailed all the time?

That's because it's morally wrong to take from others what does not rightfully belong to you.

Then clearly the government is morally worse than a petty thief, because its theft is on a massive scale.

When does the subjection to moral laws begin for DC's legalized thieves?

Everyone pays for what they do here. You just don't always see it.

If your second sentence is true, how can we possibly know your first sentence is true?

If I am the "sole determinant of how [i am] treated by government," then why didn't the IRS stop collecting a portion of my income years ago?

Or does the IRS only collect from evil people? If so, what evil did I commit that qualifies me for punishment?

We each have a very different view on this. You believe that you should be able to enjoy living in America without paying any taxes, and I don't.

I do not believe in socialism nor in the idea that the welfare class should be able to use the police power of the state to live off of the productive class.

At this stage, our supposedly Judeo/Christian government has adopted nearly half of Marx and Engels' key proposals for moving a bourgeois country towards socialism:

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax

5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state

6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State

10. Free education for all children in public schools

No, I do not enjoy paying the government to implement socialism.

Since I didn't vote for Obama or any person who enacted his Affordable Healthcare Act, how in the world is the federally managed medical industry a creation of my own image?

I didn't vote for Obama either... and right now there's a lot of people who are regretting that they did!

People demanded the government to serve them and make them feel safe and secure and "cared for" by indemnifying them against every possible contingency known to man... and all at the expense of someone else... and now they're getting exactly the government they deserve shoved right up their asses.

But even though the government does not represent me I'm not treated unfairly. I turned down everything the government offered to me because I neither needed nor wanted it, because I understand the strings attached to everything. It's a trap. ..so I simply avoid it.

. And because I have basically nothing to do with the government or with what it only appears to offer, the government basically leaves me alone to do as I see fit... to enjoy my life and my liberty to pursue my own happiness. Why? Because those rights do not come from the government. The come from God. But there's a condition... decency. No one who fails to live a life deserving of those God given rights will ever enjoy them.

I have never accepted a government handout, but that does not keep the government from robbing me to pay for others' handouts.

I've never accepted food stamps, federal loans, federally-backed insurance or any of the thousand other giveaways. None of that keeps the government away from me on tax day.

In Post #89 you wrote, "What you truly are inside is sole determinant of how you're treated by government." But each year the government, despite my wishes, seizes a large portion of the income I earn from corporate bonds and from the sale of stocks I own. How can it be said that I am the "sole determinant" of how I'm treated, when the government is doing quite the opposite of what I want?

Since I don't rob people, how can it be said that the government "represent the same values by which" I live?

Your own experience of getting the government you deserve is directly connected to the values by which you are living. And by moral law, you can only be robbed as you rob others. So I'm suggesting to you that it is a matter of your own perception. Everyone's experience of getting the government they deserve is different, because everyone lives by different values.

I have no complaints with how the government treats me. I don't rob others, and the government doesn't rob me. The government treats me exactly as decent as I am. And I'm suggesting to you that if you were to take another look, you just might discover that it does exactly the same to you.

Greg

I am glad the government is treating you well and is not using any of your tax money in ways you would disapprove of. However, my particular branch of the federal government is using its power to tell employers what they must pay employees, to tell each citizen how much health insurance he must buy, to tell manufacturers what kind of light bulbs they may not sell to U.S. consumers, to tell certain U.S. firms that they may not buy out or merge with other firms, to provide free housing (at my expense) to other citizens, to provide free education (at my expense) to other citizens, to provide free food (at my expense) to other citizens, to prosecute people for the victimless crime of putting certain chemicals into their own bodies, and to employ Marxists, socialists and progressives to teach young people that capitalism is evil, that property rights are non-existent, and that a powerful central government is good.

Now since none of the actions above are in accord with my own beliefs or the way I live my own life, the statement, "And by moral law, you can only be robbed as you rob others" is plainly untrue. It is not a matter of interpretation or perception. The government does not treat me "exactly as decent as I am" nor does it allow me to be "sole determinant" of how I'm treated.

I do not rob others, but the government does rob me.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

One of the problems I have with Christianity is the implicit sanction of the oppressive state. (The story of Samuel, who didn't like kings is an exception, but the people themselves wanted one in the story. Sanction of the victim, anyone?)

The give unto Ceasar thing is one example.

The crucifixion of Christ is another.

We complain about government excesses these days (and there are many), but we do so because we do not approve of them.

In Christianity, the advice and stories seem to say it's the way things should be. You gotta give to Ceasar because what you give is his anyway. Right?

And crucifixion was part of God's plan. Meaning there had to be a state where the practice of crucifixion was fine and dandy. That's the way things were supposed to be, apparently.

Where's the outrage of anyone in Scripture saying that it's evil to crucify people? Crickets chirping...

This attitude (or lack thereof) bothered me even before I read Rand.

But then, I've always had authority issues.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

deleted, for I made things worse

--Brant

the great improver

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

And you know why? Because, as neuroscience has shown, stories feel like life. This is literal. In fMRI scans, the same areas of the brain light up when dealing with fictional elements while processing a story as they do with corresponding real elements while processing real life.

I'm going through some footnotes in a book I have on writing and neuroscience (Wired for Story by Lisa Cron) and came across the following delightful article. It shows what I am talking about without anyone needing to plow through long technical books. You can even see images of some brain scans.

Readers build vivid mental simulations of narrative situations, brain scans suggest

By Gerry Everding

phys.org

Jan 26, 2009

From the article:

A new brain-imaging study is shedding light on what it means to "get lost" in a good book — suggesting that readers create vivid mental simulations of the sounds, sights, tastes and movements described in a textual narrative while simultaneously activating brain regions used to process similar experiences in real life.

This happens for specific stories, but does it also happen with more general stories like myths, religious stories, ideological stories (like oppressed victim stories), and so on?

Yup.

Especially for core stories.

In other words, we walk around with lots of perceived parallel universes in our minds. The most important, recurring and fundamental of those are what I call core stories.

We use these as baseline contexts to which we peg the things and people we encounter. That means we also peg dry, technical arguments to those core stories.

Communication-wise, how can mere technical words ever compete against an entire universe full of sensory input and suspenseful goal-directed actions, even an imaginary universe?

Propagandists know this and use it. And most propaganda is not even all that good storytelling. But it works because propagandists don't tell just any story. The get on the core story level of their targets and the rest is easy.

This facility extends to all forms of core stories, religion, history and tradition, actions people constantly perform within a group, myths, etc.

What do persuaders look for in core stories so they can do their bonding correctly? It's summed up nicely by a guy named Blair Warren in a technique he calls "one-sentence persuasion" (you can read a free pdf here: The One-Sentence Persuasion Course).

People will do anything for those who encourage their dreams, justify their failures, allay their fears, confirm their suspicions and help them throw rocks at their enemies.

If you make stories using these elements as your baselines, people follow. Want proof? Look around you.

Did Ayn Rand do that in her fiction?

Damned straight.

For those who have been impacted by Rand, what was one of the first impulses you had once you read her? It was to follow her.

Everybody wants to follow somebody sometime. Everybody. You, me, everybody. This is an inherent characteristic of humans. (Lead and be independent, too, but my focus is on follow right now. One does not obliterate the others unless it falls out of balance.)

People also follow because they don't just relate to the words someone says or writes, but instead they absorb the message from within one of their favorite (core) detailed, emotional and action-packed mini-universes in their heads--the one they filter most all of their perception though.

Once again, stories feel like life. And communicators--not even great ones, but great ones, too--can make their message feel like life if they tell the right stories to carry it.

Michael

[moralist]

So if it's against the law you call the cops no matter the nature of the offense?

For instance, you know your neighbor or friend cheats on his taxes and after informing the IRS he goes to prison, has all his property confiscated and you get a nice reward check from Leviathan.

Now you're being silly, Brant.

But that's a likely response to resort to the absurd and the irrational in an attempt to invalidate a moral principle. "Rendering to Caesar" concerns only me paying taxes. It has absolutely nothing to do with anything that others choose to do. I'm noting that this must have struck a nerve for you to actually attempt to falsely portray me as some kind of "squealer". That's to your shame not mine.

Are you an employee? It's a pretty good bet that you are which is very likely why taxes are such a sensitive issue for you. Just because I pay taxes does not mean that I'm stupid about it. A long time ago I realized through my own personal experience that as an employee, I had a big red tax target painted on my back. In contrast, I observed that companies and corporations have a far more favorable tax situation than employees do. This is because they assume more risk and responsibility than the employees who work for them. So I went into business for myself so as to also enjoy that same advantage. And this is why I'm not complaining about Rendering unto Caesar. It is because I took the initiative to totally assume the financial risks and responsibilities of becoming my own autonomous self directed business entity.

The other half of that moral equation you had missed is "Rendering unto God". That means doing good to honor to God because God is good. This is the key that makes the moral equation work, because, by the law of moral justice God had created and set into motion, those who do good are rewarded. And the US government, having been established upon Judeo/Christian values by men who loved what is good enough to do it even if it meant dying, the government is also governed by exactly the same laws of moral justice. And so by Divine enforcement of moral justice, my direct personal experience of government is that it treats me exactly as decent as I am.

Can you see where this puts ALL of the responsibility when there is no one else to rightfully blame for the quality of my life? It's NOT government... NOT big business... NOT bankers... NOT insurance companies... NOT Wall Street... NOT the Federal Reserve... NOT the elite... NOT the media... NOT politicians... NOT the rich... NOT the powerful...

...just ME.

Greg

[moralist]

I am glad the government is treating you well and is not using any of your tax money in ways you would disapprove of. However, my particular branch of the federal government is using its power to tell employers what they must pay employees, to tell each citizen how much health insurance he must buy, to tell manufacturers what kind of light bulbs they may not sell to U.S. consumers, to tell certain U.S. firms that they may not buy out or merge with other firms, to provide free housing (at my expense) to other citizens, to provide free education (at my expense) to other citizens, to provide free food (at my expense) to other citizens, to prosecute people for the victimless crime of putting certain chemicals into their own bodies, and to employ Marxists, socialists and progressives to teach young people that capitalism is evil, that property rights are non-existent, and that a powerful central government is good.

But don't you see that the indecent have demanded everything you are describing? I guess not.

Everything on your laundry list of complaints is simply the just and deserved consequence of there not being enough decent Americans living in America.

The American system of government only works for decent people... not for the indecent. And the only reason it is not working as it was designed by the Founders is because of catastrophic personal moral failure on a massive scale.

“The blessed Religion revealed in the word of God will remain an eternal and awful monument to prove that the best Institutions may be abused by human depravity; and that they may even, in some instances be made subservient to the vilest of purposes.”

― George Washington

Now since none of the actions above are in accord with my own beliefs or the way I live my own life, the statement, "And by moral law, you can only be robbed as you rob others" is plainly untrue. It is not a matter of interpretation or perception. The government does not treat me "exactly as decent as I am" nor does it allow me to be "sole determinant" of how I'm treated.

I do not rob others, but the government does rob me.

Well, our two disparate views demonstrate that two individuals can live in exactly the same world...

...and one lives in Paradise...

...while the other lives in Hell.

Greg

[Jules Troy]

Yes I am in Canada.

Yes I am an employee. In other words "bend over and take it up the tailpipe if you work as much overtime as I do. A true case if tall poppy syndrome where the harder you work to keep your head above water the more they gouge you.

So what this allows is welfare mothers are actually encouraged to have more kids. A responsible middle income family has to look at its finances and say to themselves " we can only afford 1 or 2". That is all they have.

If however you are on social assistance..4-5 by 5 different sperm doner fools is not uncommon.

Free healthcare, free housing, free everything.

Except healthcare is not of course free. I call it wait till you die healthcare. 6 months wait for a MRI. 2 years for knee or hip replacement surgery. People dying in the hallways in emergency because they sit there for 6 hours.

I could go on.

Btw. I am a staunch believer in the American constitution as it was penned. I also believe these rights to be universal.

[Brant Gaede]

Now you're being silly, Brant.

But that's a likely response to resort to the absurd and the irrational in an attempt to invalidate a moral principle. "Rendering to Caesar" concerns only me paying taxes. It has absolutely nothing to do with anything that others choose to do. I'm noting that this must have struck a nerve for you to actually attempt to falsely portray me as some kind of "squealer". That's to your shame not mine.

Greg

No, no, no. The last thing I would expect from you is that you'd actually do something like that. I was trying to point out some logical consequences of your position, not what kind of man (ad hominem) you must be.

--Brant

a reductio ad absurdum doesn't mean you are absurd

[moralist]

Yes I am in Canada.

Yes I am an employee. In other words "bend over and take it up the tailpipe if you work as much overtime as I do. A true case if tall poppy syndrome where the harder you work to keep your head above water the more they gouge you...

Why not use that sentiment you just expressed as self motivation to strike out on your own?

...Btw. I am a staunch believer in the American constitution as it was penned. I also believe these rights to be universal.

Then lay claim to them by changing how you live.

Greg

[SoAMadDeathWish]

The American system of government only works for decent people... not for the indecent. And the only reason it is not working as it was designed by the Founders is because of catastrophic personal moral failure on a massive scale.

Pretty serious design flaw, if there ever was one... Like a cure that only works on healthy patients....

[Brant Gaede]

The American system of government only works for decent people... not for the indecent. And the only reason it is not working as it was designed by the Founders is because of catastrophic personal moral failure on a massive scale.

Pretty serious design flaw, if there ever was one... Like a cure that only works on healthy patients....

Bullseye!

--Brant

[Francisco Ferrer]

I am glad the government is treating you well and is not using any of your tax money in ways you would disapprove of. However, my particular branch of the federal government is using its power to tell employers what they must pay employees, to tell each citizen how much health insurance he must buy, to tell manufacturers what kind of light bulbs they may not sell to U.S. consumers, to tell certain U.S. firms that they may not buy out or merge with other firms, to provide free housing (at my expense) to other citizens, to provide free education (at my expense) to other citizens, to provide free food (at my expense) to other citizens, to prosecute people for the victimless crime of putting certain chemicals into their own bodies, and to employ Marxists, socialists and progressives to teach young people that capitalism is evil, that property rights are non-existent, and that a powerful central government is good.

But don't you see that the indecent have demanded everything you are describing? I guess not.

Everything on your laundry list of complaints is simply the just and deserved consequence of there not being enough decent Americans living in America.

In Post #89 you wrote, "What you truly are inside is sole determinant of how you're treated by government." Therefore, if I have decided that I do not wish to be forced to buy more health insurance than I want or to subsidize Marxists in the state university or to finance DEA raids on drug dealers, then I alone should control what happens to any portion of the income I earn and should be able to stop the product of my labor from being spent on those government activities.

But now you are saying that the statism is the "consequence of there not being enough decent Americans living in America." What does the number of decent Americans have to do with the ability of my inner self to determine my treatment by the government? This contradicts your statement that what I am inside is the sole determinant.

The American system of government only works for decent people... not for the indecent. And the only reason it is not working as it was designed by the Founders is because of catastrophic personal moral failure on a massive scale.

But I am not indecent. I have obeyed the Ten Commandments. I treat everyone I meet with respect and consideration. Therefore, according to your own words, the government should treat me "exactly as decent as I am."

Whatever you may wish to believe, the government does rob me--and robs me to further the advent of full blown socialism..

As I said earlier in the thread, there is no fit between your theory and history.

“The blessed Religion revealed in the word of God will remain an eternal and awful monument to prove that the best Institutions may be abused by human depravity; and that they may even, in some instances be made subservient to the vilest of purposes.”

― George Washington

Now since none of the actions above are in accord with my own beliefs or the way I live my own life, the statement, "And by moral law, you can only be robbed as you rob others" is plainly untrue. It is not a matter of interpretation or perception. The government does not treat me "exactly as decent as I am" nor does it allow me to be "sole determinant" of how I'm treated.

I do not rob others, but the government does rob me.

Well, our two disparate views demonstrate that two individuals can live in exactly the same world...

...and one lives in Paradise...

...while the other lives in Hell.

Greg

It may be true that one decent person lives in paradise while another lives in hell.

What has not been shown is any evidence for your claims

That what we are truly are inside is sole determinant of how we're treated by government.

That people deserving of God given rights enjoy them.

That the government treats people exactly as decent as they are.

If you pay taxes to the federal government, a portion of that money goes to fund federal regulation of commerce, energy, medical care, banking, campaign donations, stock sales, agriculture, food, drugs, alcohol, tobacco, firearms, transportation and hundreds of other human endeavors.

Now if the government's use of the product of your labor to maintain a massive regulatory state and to promote the growth of that state by hiring Marxists and progressives to indoctrinate the young into voting for future Obamas is your idea of paradise, so be it.

It does not follow, however, that other decent people are going to be as complacent about a forced march down the road to serfdom

[Jules Troy]

Yes I am in Canada.

Yes I am an employee. In other words "bend over and take it up the tailpipe if you work as much overtime as I do. A true case if tall poppy syndrome where the harder you work to keep your head above water the more they gouge you...

Why not use that sentiment you just expressed as self motivation to strike out on your own?

...Btw. I am a staunch believer in the American constitution as it was penned. I also believe these rights to be universal.

Then lay claim to them by changing how you live.

Greg

[Jules Troy]

Bingo!

[moralist]

In Post #89 you wrote, "What you truly are inside is sole determinant of how you're treated by government." Therefore, if I have decided that I do not wish to be forced to buy more health insurance than I want or to subsidize Marxists in the state university or to finance DEA raids on drug dealers, then I alone should control what happens to any portion of the income I earn and should be able to stop the product of my labor from being spent on those government activities.

Have you ever stopped for a moment to notice just how impotent your complaints are?

Just to offer a contrast between your your approach on those issues you listed, and how I deal with them: I don't buy any health insurance at all and simply pay cash directly for all of our healthcare needs. This is how I operate entirely outside of the whole insurance system, because it's just a bunch of people all of whom expect someone else to pay their bills. So I pay my own bills, thank you. You also would never find me sitting like a useless inert lump in any nannystate subsidized University because that's where the failures are, instead I choose to get a real education out in the real world. And dope is for adolescents, not for adult men and women.

But now you are saying that the statism is the "consequence of there not being enough decent Americans living in America."

Yes, that's true. But it doesn't mean that Americans can't enjoy their lives. It all comes down to this:

How do you learn to live a good life in an evil world? The solution is to build a good world. First within yourself, and then around you within your sphere of personal influence. Then evil becomes displaced outside the borders of your personal influence even though you can still watch it from a safe distance on network television news.

The government does NOT treat everyone uniformly. Surely you can see that, can't you? Please let me know whether or not you see the truth that each individual's direct personal experience of government van vary widely from others, because this point determines the utility of continuing the discussion.

Your inner self does not think and mull over and make a decision on how you ~feel~ you ~ought~ to be treated by the government. What you ARE inside has already set into motion how the government treats you. It can only respond to what you truly are inside, because it is subject to exactly the same moral law that you are.

This contradicts your statement that what I am inside is the sole determinant.

Well, in my view it doesn't, so we can just agree that we each see that from different points of view.

But I am not indecent. I have obeyed the Ten Commandments. I treat everyone I meet with respect and consideration. Therefore, according to your own words, the government should treat me "exactly as decent as I am."

Not ~should~. This is not a matter of what you think and feel ~should~ be. It is just what IS.

Whatever you may wish to believe, the government does rob me--and robs me to further the advent of full blown socialism.

Well... then all I can say is go for it, Frank.

Just go right ahead and indulge yourself in angrily blaming the government because you think that it does not treat you how you ~feel~ you should be treated... for all the good that it won't do you. But at least consider the possibility that there is absolutely no possible solution to be found in the attitude of blaming others.

Greg

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

The American system of government only works for decent people... not for the indecent. And the only reason it is not working as it was designed by the Founders is because of catastrophic personal moral failure on a massive scale.

Pretty serious design flaw, if there ever was one... Like a cure that only works on healthy patients....

Bullseye!

--Brant

Brant,

Not bullseye.

Bulllllll Shitttttttt--and a heaping steaming pile of it.

Government is not a cure. It is not some kind of inherent benefit to mankind like medicine.

It is a monster to be tamed.

Government and Human Nature

As Thomas Paine said in Common Sense,

SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.

Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.

"... we furnish the means by which we suffer." That sounds like what Greg is saying to me.

A constitutional republic only works for a moral people who are mainly interested in being good. To think this is a contradiction or weakness is something along the lines of the fallacy of the single cause and a wish to impose the perfect collective system on the individual instead of trying to derive a collective system that works from the individual's nature.

And how do you make a mistake of judgment this big? You limit the individual (in your premises) to an oversimplified single nature. Then you provide for him. And you limit the government to an oversimplified single nature and complain that it never seems to work out right. (That last never fails.)

Government ultimately emerges from human nature, it does not cure human nature.

If there is a predominance of bullies in a group of people, you are going to get constant gang war in government. If there are a bunch of passive sheeple, there will be some bullies to come along once in a while and take over. If there are confident productive people of goodwill, you will get a far less ugly government than elsewhere--even in a very bad system like a monarchy.

People are not all the same. They are born with different temperaments, different innate abilities, different situations, and they make some very different decisions as they grow up and live.

One government has to be valid for them all in a society: bully, sheeple, peace-loving producer, criminal, etc., and, yes, even the helpless. All of them.

If you give the majority, the most productive people, a lot of goodies and no moral instruction as they go along, you create sheeple. Weak spineless critters who will obey. That's exactly what's happening today. Guess what's happening in the government? Dictatorship doesn't sound right, but dictatorship by oligarchy sure does.

Why do we put up with it? Are we mere passive victims who can't do anything about it, so we might as well give up and make peace with our masters? Well, that's one morality.

There happens to be another for those who want it.

Maintenance of Morality

One of the things I admire about the institution of churches is that the meetings are periodic and within a relatively short time frame. You go once a week to bone up on your morality. Why? Because implementing morality is like eating. You don't just eat one meal and you're done. After a while you're hungry again and you have to eat again, on pain of becoming weak. Morality is the same. You don't just decide something is good or bad and then you're done. You have to be reminded because shit changes all the time. Life is complicated. You forget and lose enthusiasm for your morals as you deal with life.

That is the function of weekly sermons--to keep your moral principles top of mind. Or lectures if you constantly go to them. Or books on morality. Or any kind of moral commentary on stories, including real ones, that you consume on a constant basis. Or even discussion forums centered on morality.

As I said elsewhere, we humans think in stories and we always want to know what they mean. Telling stories and explaining them is the bread and butter of moral teaching. Note this is not learning about morality. It is maintaining it and honing it. If you don't, any moral principles you choose will wither inside you over time.

I have used the following example before, but it bears repeating. If you take a group of hardened criminals to a desert island and set them free, but instruct them first in the principles of constitutional government, individual rights, etc. Even morality. And when you let them go, you already give them structures (but not people) for their institutions: constitution, meeting halls and churches, libraries, schools, medical facilities, etc., guess what will happen? Come back in six months and see if most are still alive and/or observe the gang warfare that occurred during that time.

Moral and Immoral Culture

Greg is right. An immoral people will get an immoral government.

That actually means a predominantly immoral people will get a predominantly immoral government because there is no such thing as 100% immoral people. That is the "single cause" in the fallacy I mentioned.

We all have a choice, even in horrible circumstances, until we become incapacitated or die. Look what Viktor Frankl did in the Nazi death camps for an extreme example of exercising that choice: Man's Search for Meaning.

So let's get clear on this meaning thing. Moral people means a culture of morality, which means MOST of the people within a culture MOST of the time, not ALL of the people ALL of the time.

Hell, a moral people already get an immoral government because the side of human nature attracted to power is not too concerned with morality, but instead on increasing its power. That side is innately immoral and needs to be tamed.

The Nature of Power and Power Lust

Power lust is not a lust for "collective power" or "distributive power" or any other smoke-and-mirrors jargon that tries to dress this up and make it sound positive. It is a lust for personal power, meaning the ability to tell people what to do and make them do it, even if they don't want to. And to act with impunity when you punish them or kill them.

That is power over other humans. That is all it has ever been and all it will ever be. And that is the prize the power-lusters seek. Unfortunately, we all have to deal with that urge in our souls. Some let it run free. Others tame it.

This is why slicing and dicing power in a checks and balances system is so important. If people are moral and a checks and balances system is their government, they will fight with those in power to keep them contained when the monkey-shines get out of hand. If the people themselves are immoral, the most clever thug will gain a crapload more of power than his predecessors and government power will increase.

The wonder of the American government is not that it has become slowly transformed in the opposite direction the Founding Fathers had intended for it, but that it is still standing.

We are a people who have produced more goodies than the world has ever known, we have become soft and complacent, and the government still can't do as it pleases with us all the time. That is a testament to the good part of our character, not merely an indictment of the wicked.

A Change Coming

There is a huge push to change the culture right now in a more moral direction. Unfortunately, this effort is mostly coming from Christian sources (but thank God they, at least, are doing something). Rick Santorum is now devoted to producing movies. Glenn Beck has started a cultural movement all his own, with books, films, TV shows, documentaries, etc. Even Hollywood is producing biblical movies all of a sudden. And on and on.

(btw - If you look at the content, to the extent these productions promote libertarian-like messages, the more popular they are. The more namby-pamby goody-goody two-shoes they are, or the more they try to sneak in leftist messages, the more they flop.)

Watch what happens to government if these efforts succeed in getting people to think more about morality. There's a Convention of States to change the constitution on the horizon and the thrust is not expanded government. Without this cultural change, I don't believe it will ever happen. If this culture changes (which I believe), I don't see how it cannot.

Government is like a cure, my ass.

Bah!

Michael

EDIT: I added some titles to chop this long-ass read up and make it easier.