Stop Playing the Government Game
Posted by Alex R. Knight III on Sep 21, 2009 in Feature Articles • 1 commentThat the age-worn tactic continues to be effective is nothing short of astonishing, I would think, to any anarchist. An American president makes a policy announcement that equals a political mandate to Congress, that in turn sparks a society-wide debate, and more often than not, leads to an increase in taxes, expansion of government, and hosts of new obligations foisted on all Americans at gunpoint.
Such is currently the nature of Obamacare. At the level of the average American, it isn’t even really a debate. It’s Obama and, mostly, Democrats saying, “You don’t like this? Tough! We’re doing it. It’s the right thing, and it’s for your own good.” Can that kind of arrogance ever be reconciled against the concept of liberty? Moreover, how is it that the average American has become almost symbiotically attached to government – an institution that accomplishes all of its goals through theft and violence?
Observe some of Obama’s statements during a recent speech he gave regarding his proposed health care “reform”:
“Health care’s about more than the details of a policy. It’s about what kind of country you want to be,” Obama said. “I’m going to seek common ground in the weeks ahead. If you come to me with a set of serious proposals, I will be there to listen. My door is always open. But know this: I will not waste time with those who’ve made the calculation that it’s better to kill health reform than to improve our health care system.”
No dictator ever made things more clear by way of stark implication: I’m the boss, I will have my way just as surely as the sun rises in the east tomorrow morning, and if you stand in my way you’ll be sorry.” Period, the end. No real room for discussion. No real “debate.” Americans will have universal health care according to my model – or something very closely akin – they will pay for it whether they like it or want it or not, or they will suffer sever penalties at the hands of the IRS.
Few people, in the mainstream press, at least, are talking about the raw arrogance of this position. Americans are already forced at the barrel of a gun to pay income taxes (the very legality of which has been placed in question by numerous individual researchers, but then all government laws are themselves illegitimate acts of arrogance; opinions of bureaucrats backed up by lethal force), FICA (Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid) taxes, and an almost incalculable myriad of other federal, state, and local taxes – from property to sales to gasoline. Along with this means documenting our economic and even social activity on endless reams of senseless paper, filing returns, hiring accountants and lawyers, and responding to audits – while constantly under the threat of lien and levy. Now Obama and a large swath of Congress want to increase the scope and burden of these obligations on Americans even more. With no end to such a pattern of vicious behavior anywhere in sight.
Even those who were blind and foolish enough to vote last November largely did so for entirely unrelated reasons: To punish Republicans, to end the war in Iraq, to end the warrantless wiretapping and at least some provisions of the PATRIOT Act. Hardly a blip on the electorate’s radar screen was the “issue” of health care reform. Now we have it center stage – even the war in Afghanistan is playing second fiddle to such further madness – while none of the reasons voters chose Obama for in the first place have been in any way changed or addressed. Most of these same voters, in election after election, simply shake their heads in disgust – and then go ahead and vote again in the next election cycle. Anarchists simply go about their lives, even more acutely disgusted, but in no way, shape, or form surprised.
When will the public at large learn the government con-game, and the way it’s played over and over and over again ad infinitum? One would think that, the principles of mass-psychology notwithstanding, enough individuals capable of independent thought would have seen through all of this by now. Especially the minarchist/small government crowd, whose ideals are pure fantasy – as history has conclusively proven – while zero-government anarchism remains a viable possibility. Chalk it all up to near-constant mass-conditioning by the usual culprits: Mass media, the government-controlled tax-financed public schools, the ability of governments to create a culture of dependency. Thus, typically, when the anarchist presents himself as a voice of clarity and reason, this is shouted down as both lunacy and heresy. For of course everyone knows that the earth is flat, that flight is impossible, that slavery is just a natural part of the human condition, that eating tomatoes will kill you.
Government artificially escalated the cost of health care to begin with by making physician licensing mandatory – and then has followed that act of arrogance with interventionary law after act of intrusion after creation of red tape – ever driving up the costs of health care. Now, Obama proposes that government make health care more affordable. In other words, we broke your legs, and now we’re handing you a set of crutches which should only prove how essential we are to your well-being and survival. Problem, reaction, solution is another way of illustrating this entirely devious and scatalogical phenomenon. Those who buy into it, however, really have no one but themselves to blame. We all still have the power as individuals to deny government, and walk away.
Yes, Obamacare is bad, and if this monstrosity passes through the sties of Congress to be signed in the presidential cesspool of the White House, I look no more forward than many of those reading this to having a mandatory health insurance plan rammed down my throat by the IRS. The difference is that I won’t have conscientiously chosen, in any manner, to be ruled by the government who does this to us all. I will not have supported or participated in its lies. This is a call for you to emancipate yourself. Stop voting, stop cheering on these liars and usurpers and invaders of your life. Choose independence and freedom. Do not consent to be governed. Choose no government.
C4SS News Analyst Alex R. Knight III is an author of horror, science fiction, and fantasy tales, living and writing in rural southern Vermont. He is the author of Victoria's Place and Other Tales of Terror (BareBones Publishing, 2008), and numerous other works, including non-fiction and poetry. He is also a regular contributor to the libertarian journal Strike The Root.
“…I look no more forward than many of those reading this to having a mandatory health insurance plan rammed down my throat by the IRS. The difference is that I won’t have conscientiously chosen, in any manner, to be ruled by the government who does this to us all. I will not have supported or participated in its lies. This is a call for you to emancipate yourself. Stop voting, stop cheering on these liars and usurpers and invaders of your life. Choose independence and freedom. Do not consent to be governed. Choose no government.”
Well phrased, Alex. I and husband Paul Wakfer view this situation (and all the many others related to government) in very much the same way. And I made a very similar “call” last April in regards to activist protesting not being enough – “Tax/Regulation Protests are Not Enough: Relationship of Self-Responsibility and Social Order” (http://selfsip.org/focus/protestsnotenough.html ).
“When will the public at large learn the government con-game, and the way it’s played over and over and over again ad infinitum? One would think that, the principles of mass-psychology notwithstanding, enough individuals capable of independent thought would have seen through all of this by now. Especially the minarchist/small government crowd, whose ideals are pure fantasy – as history has conclusively proven – while zero-government anarchism remains a viable possibility. Chalk it all up to near-constant mass-conditioning by the usual culprits: Mass media, the government-controlled tax-financed public schools, the ability of governments to create a culture of dependency. Thus, typically, when the anarchist presents himself as a voice of clarity and reason, this is shouted down as both lunacy and heresy.”
The vast majority of people think that some form of government is inevitable because it is the only manner in which an orderly society can exist. They are certain that disorder and chaos would prevail without laws/commandments/regulations/tennets/etc. – all of these from some law maker/giver, whatever the process. While it is certainly true that small governments have, in recent recorded history (at least the past few hundred years), all become much larger in size and scope (until overthrown to start the build again), I disagree that “the minarchist/small government crowd” are largely “capable of independent thought” – or else they would be anarchists!
Society, just like any other natural system can be self-regulating by means of interactions between its members, if only humans are allowed to develop the methods by which such self-regulation can be effective, rather than the social system constantly being held in an unnatural (and very unoptimal) state of balance by the operations of its rulers and other influencers. However, virtually no anarchist has developed a sufficient basis upon which an orderly society can exist and prosper. The Non-Aggression Principle” and the “free-market” are insufficient since the first with its numerous exceptions is neither a consistent nor a complete principle on which ethical actions can be based, while the second is a means requiring ethical principles on which to operate for the benefit of all participants. Going back to first principles to discover what humans truly need to optimize their interactions is what is needed, and has been done in “Social Meta-Needs: A New Basis for Optimal Interaction”. http://selfsip.org/fundamentals/socialmetaneeds.html
The abstract of this paper follows. Please note that many words and phrases used in the text are effectively the technical terms of the presented theory. All such usages are indicated by their beginning letter (and letter beginning their root part) being capitalized and their first usage within a new section (after the Abstract) is linked to an unambiguous definition within the treatise or elsewhere.
>>>Evidence from a variety of science and social disciplines is integrated to create a new approach to the basis and determination of the optimal methods of Social InterActions within Society. A new concept is defined and developed: Social Meta-Needs – those properties of the Environment of InterActions within Society common to all Members, which facilitate the highest possible attainment of Lifetime Happiness by each. Ethical egoism is redefined as a hypothetical imperative that is shown to be fully compossible and to form a logical and consistent basis for human Actions that will achieve the Social Meta-Needs. It is argued that the concept of “rights” is neither a complete nor a consistent basis for human Liberty, and that “rights” should be replaced by Stipulations concerning Entitlements and Responsibilities within a new conception of a Social Contract in order to facilitate the achievement of the Social Meta-Needs – the Members of the Society being those who Execute the Contract together with all their Property. The nature of Harm and Violation within the redefined concept of ethical egoism, and the principles for their determination, are considered in relationship to the Social Meta-Needs. It is argued that the Social Meta-Needs require that the only reasonable justice ethic is the complete restoration of a Victim to the State of Happiness in which he would have been if the Violation had not occurred, with the amount and type of Restitution Required being determined solely by the Victim. The limitations and the practical implementation of such an ethic are also discussed. The Natural Social Contract is provided as an embodiment of that portion of the Social Meta-Needs which can be enabled and stabilized by means of formal Stipulations. Full and complete Social Preferencing, effectively extending market preferencing to all aspects of human interaction, is shown to constitute the less formal, but more essential means to achieve the Social Meta-Needs. Unambiguous definitions of many terms and concepts are made, as a necessary part of the developments introduced.<<<
Hopefully, Alex, you and other anarchists (and even curious miniarchists) will read the full paper and its links. Then challenge its author (Paul Wakfer) with any found inconsistencies or lackings; present a potential problem situation in the Society where it is not clear from the treatise how it would be handled and ask. If the theory has faults, the author wants to know where they are so that they can be corrected. If the theory is a major discovery (as I am convinced), then anarchists who use its reasonings will truly be "voice[s] of clarity and reason," and have their presentations less likely to be "shouted down as both lunacy and heresy".
I know this has been a lengthy comment, but the general subject on which you wrote is vitally important as you are well aware. The principles on which rest a solution are even more so.