Skip to main content

The Government Flu: Deadlier Than COVID-19

Worse than any virus is the contagion that controls what the people think and say. Feverishly searching for answers, they latch on to those ideas which appear sensible to them yet go unexamined by those lacking the tools and acumen to conduct such a test. 

The spread of mistruths, then, much like an uncontrollable pandemic, infects each person ill-equipped to defend himself against it. With the incessant flow of mistruths, the immunodeficient public unfailingly succumbs to them without any knowledge of what or how it happened.  

This is the contagion of Leftism, which feeds off of desperation, ignorance and, above all, hysteria. Social hysteria is merely the preferred tool of the day for prying into the homes and lives of the average voter. 

In reflecting upon the list of household names from just a year ago, one can gain a meaningful insight into the political interests at work over the past few months. An election year, the many household names of today have merely succeeded in making their way into your lives through some of the most creative campaigns to date. However sincere or convicted in their beliefs, each of the new household names has vastly improved his party’s odds of success in the forthcoming election. 

The so-called “experts” have once again come out of the woodwork to tell the public both what to think and what to say. Under the pretense of caring about the people, these politicians have swindled the public into believing that they actually represent them, when in fact they merely represent themselves and the interests which stand to best serve them. 

In its exercise of force while erring on the side of caution, Leftism stands to win either way. Either it appears justified in stripping people of their rights to stem the growing threat or, more commonly, it takes solace in having been "responsible" enough to err on the side of caution. In appearing sensible, Leftism is not only disingenuous but far more destructive than any of its advocates will ever care to admit. 

Indeed, operating from the benefit of conscience and false prophecy, the most insidious threat of Leftism is the incredulousness with which its advocates appraise its risks. According to the Leftist, every one of its risks is a “conspiracy theory” or a remote possibility; insofar as the Leftist acknowledges a risk, it’s deemed a worthwhile sacrifice. And wherever any legitimate threats are posed to their vile, criminally wicked institutions, the Leftist decries them as terrorism.

There is no way to reason with such a cult, as they wiggle and squirm their way out of every debacle and every last argument. Even in the face of fact, whether the laws of physics, those of economics, or those of the United States Constitution, their incredulousness will render them impervious to the onslaught of reality. Where they lack the tools to solve any such problem, whether physical or abstract, the Leftist will predictably use his words to talk his way out of the problem, to rally public opinion and beat his opponents into submission. 

Whether it’s a demanding employer, a disagreeable classmate, or an offensive academic concept, the Leftist will publicize his condemnation until that person, that law or that idea has been virtually eliminated from his world; at minimum, the Leftist will not stop until it ceases to present itself in public. 

This means that, while you may privately harbor some view, you mustn’t dare share it in public, for fear of the movement making an unfortunate example of you. Instead, as is the case with the festering of Leftism, it’s left to command every aspect of society as people yield everywhere for fear of being singled out. 

Leftism, treated as some sort of disorder or exotic culture, festers in a community. Where family and friends hesitate to challenge the Leftist for fear of insulting him, the Leftist is empowered to persist in his ways. 

All too often, respectable people treat Leftism the same way they would treat any clinical disorder or physical abnormality: for fear of offending the individual, most simply ignore it, look the other way, or at least try to be respectful about it. 

However, Leftism is not a disorder or abnormality cured by passivity; it’s best contested at every margin upon every opportunity. Where Leftism enters the realm of protected categories, as it appears to have already indirectly accomplished, the public will yield until they’ve ceded every power and authority to it. They will have yielded politely and respectfully while the Leftists have pursued their stations relentlessly and unapologetically. 

This is not a battle won through decency; it’s one wholly dependent upon every free man’s will to preserve that freedom against the tyrants who will happily corner them into getting their every wish. Predictably, they seem get their way by conning the public into playing nicely as they have their way with them. And don’t think for a moment that any list of laws, however sacred to any land or any peoples, will prevent them from taking aim and laying siege. 

Indeed, instead of limiting government per the Framers' intentions, the Constitution of the United States is today leveraged to justify government measures or otherwise, in the majority of cases, loosely interpreted or wholly disregarded to undertake others. 

So long as government strikes some kind of balance, they can apparently avoid rebellion as citizens paying the slightest of attention simply afford them some flexibility or leniency on the terms, perhaps on some innocuous suspicion that they don't know any better; unfortunately, that balance is continually tilted away from freedom and the Constitution in favor of government and tyranny, a soft despotism that gradually tightens the noose around the necks of a citizenry too fearful or uneducated to say anything, much less mount any meaningful resistance. 

And with the mutual resentment fostered by class warfare and racial division, the sane American has little cause to fight anyway; severed of his connection with community, his neighbors and his fellow man, not to mention those vague abstractions of country and liberty, he’s left merely to fight for himself and his family, ultimately a self-defeating cause in the face of almost certain defeat. 

In this case, he and his family are better off either moving or simply tolerating each encroachment upon their liberties, so long as they’re sharing together in the struggle. By endorsing the institutions of socialism, communism or whatever style of collectivism — institutions modified only by semantics and the means by which they intend to conquer their subjects — the Leftist seeks to con his fellow man, whom he despises with all of his might, into accepting the designs of his own servitude. 

The Leftist is hardly inclined to socialize, as one might naturally expect from one who fancies himself a socialist; on the contrary, his interests in society extend only as far as he perceives political value in each of his comrades who, in their increasing numbers, form a mob uniquely capable of having their way with the rest of society. And it’s no coincidence that collectivistic notions prevail over times of destitution when mankind is at its weakest. 

In this sense, these institutions have always laid claim to comrades and countries prepared to accept a little tyranny for a little relief. Of course, once that government gets a taste of a little tyranny, it goes for as much as it can muster; and after some time, that relief — or at least that perception of relief — is in short order recognized for the burden it poses. As with modern times, where we find comrades rejoicing in the perception of free money and handouts as they enjoy their time away from work, the economic illiterate have been conditioned to see themselves as victims and their employers as villains. 

Socialism is popular among the lay and intellectual classes alike because they mistake their professions and their bosses as standing between them and the goods they enjoy, as opposed to recognizing them as the means by which they are made sufficiently productive to enjoy those goods. It’s no coincidence that those people who think workers are exploited by their employers also think the jobs themselves are “non-essential.” And it’s also no coincidence that a citizenry better acquainted with debt than wealth is also prepared to endorse socialism as their solution. 

Whereas the average citizen has virtually no understanding of investments and sound money, he is well-versed in taking out large sums of debt to indulge beyond his means; oddly enough, the average American's recent spending spree at Walmart and Target, upon receipt of his $1,200 stimulus check, further evidences this notion. Instead of investing the funds, Americans have squandered the windfall on consumer goods: toys, clothes and electronics.   

This is precisely the line of thinking which leaves Americans incurably broke and eternally incapable of helping themselves. Furthermore, this leaves them susceptible to the line of thinking which concludes that any chance they have of success hinges on their ability — or the ability of some hired help, such as government — to take from some to give to others. They simply know no other way.

So long as they have access to Amazon and Netflix, and so long as they can count on their next meal, most Americans are generally unbothered by the gradual encroachments upon their freedoms. The annals of history are replete with such examples of tyranny and genocide where civilizations succumbed to inaction in the face of "reasonable" or "justified" government overreach. Whether it’s a tyrant like Caligula, who indulged in riotous extravagance and tortured hundreds of his subjects for his own personal enjoyment, or it’s a more ascetic and industrious one, such as Augustus Caesar, who toiled for the welfare of his empire, its people and Roman world peace, wherever their political means are somehow justified by the ends, tyranny always winds up hurting people and leaving far more casualties in its wake than ever imagined. 

Even in the case of an empire as sophisticated as Rome, the designs of their planned economy eventually ushered in restrictive economic regulations and uncompromising directives which left farmers unable to farm and small businessmen starving and suicidal. In the decline of the Roman Empire, just before its collapse into the Dark Ages, the people were eventually left unemployed, so the beneficent government leapt at the opportunity to tax the rich to provide the populace with bread and circus tickets. While this offered some short-term relief to the people, it accomplished nothing in the way of remedying the problems which ailed them, and they were ultimately doomed to ruin, left to suffer centuries of economic despair.

In the present case, faced with the threat of a pandemic, the tyrants needn’t reach very far or think nearly as creatively to swindle their subjects into their own subjection; in this case, the subjects are more than willing to handcuff themselves and their neighbors on the tyrants’ behalf while placing themselves under house arrest; what’s more, a great many are eager to even celebrate government overreach as they spend each day at home in their pajamas and collect unemployment checks in excess of their normal take-home pay. 

Ultimately, the administration is literally buying its subjects' acquiescence to tyranny, while the unwitting subjects are no less pleased to oblige. After all, it’s not that hard to cast a vote, to check a box and cash those checks. Alas, the pitfalls of democracy. 

Make no mistake, every government initiative serves to test your tolerance for tyranny. With your support or in your silence, your acquiescence to the unlawful commands of government confirms that the despots are completely in control of your rights; rights that were once deemed natural, with which we were endowed by our Creator, are gradually redefined as privileges administered by that government formerly entrusted to defend those rights. And when that system fails to properly defend those rights and uphold the terms of that sacred agreement, that social contract, it is the right of free people to alter or abolish it.


Popular posts from this blog

America's Civil War: Not "Civil" and Not About Slavery

Virtually the entirety of South and Central America, as well as European powers Britain, Spain and France, peacefully abolished slavery — without war — in the first sixty years of the nineteenth century.  Why, then, did the United States enter into a bloody war that cost over half of the nation’s wealth, at least 800,000 lives and many hundreds of thousands more in casualties?  The answer: the War Between the States was not about slavery.  It was a war of invasion to further empower the central government and to reject state sovereignty, nullification of unconstitutional laws, and the states’ rights to secession.  It was a war that would cripple the South and witness the federal debt skyrocket from $65 million in 1860 to $2.7 billion in 1865, whose annual interest alone would prove twice as expensive as the entire federal budget from 1860. Likewise, it was a war that would witness a five-fold increase in the number of civilians employed by the federal government, as federal gove

Into the Wild: An Economics Lesson

There is a great deal of substance behind the Keynesian motif, “In the long run, we’re all dead.” If this is your prerogative, your axiom, we are destined to differ on matters of principle and timeline. Surely, any quantity or decided cash figure is relevant exclusively to the available produce yielded by its trade. The current valuation thereof, whilst unadulterated, corroborates a rather stable, predictable trend of expectations, whereas its significance wanes once reconfigured by a process of economic, fiscal or monetary manipulation.  Individuals, vast in their interests and their time preferences and overall appetites, are to be made homogeneous by an overarching system which predetermines the price floors, ceilings and general priorities of life. Of course, all of this exists merely in abstract form. However, the supposition proposed by those who champion the agenda of “basic needs” fails to complement the progress achieved by the abolition of presumed guilt by the sole mis

Cullen Roche's Not So "Pragmatic Capitalism"

In his riveting new work Pragmatic Capitalism , Cullen Roche, founder of Orcam Financial Group, a San Diego-based financial firm, sets out to correct the mainstream schools of economic thought, focusing on  Keynesians, Monetarists, and Austrians alike. This new macroeconomic perspective claims to reveal What Every Investor Needs to Know About Money and Finance . Indeed, Roche introduces the layman to various elementary principles of economics and financial markets, revealing in early chapters the failed state of the average hedge fund and mutual fund operators -- who are better car salesmen than financial pundits, Roche writes --  who have fallen victim to the group think phenomenon, spawning the nearly perfect positive correlation to the major indexes, and thus, accounting for tax, inflation, and service adjustments, holistically wiping out any value added by their supposed market insight.  Roche also references popular studies, such as the MckInsey Global Institute's report whi