Puzzling out the election leads to a quiet conclusion
Much wailing and gnashing of teeth on one side, and much grinning and self-satisfaction on t'other. "What does it mean? What does it mean?" on one side, and "It means we set the table" on t'other.
Let's if I can figure out what it means:
In each of the last four presidential elections, the winner was the one who said things like "The era of big government is over" and "I'm a Reagan Republican." You remember Reagan; he's the one who said, "In our present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government is the problem."
After each of the last four presidential elections, the winner turned to proving once again that actions speak louder than words. The era of big government did not end between 1993 and 2001, and since the self-proclaimed Reagan Republican took office, the proposed solution to our problem has been government time and time again.
Lousy schools? No Child Left Behind.
Prescription drug prices going nuts? Medicare Part D.
Stupid political ads on TV out of control? McCain-Feingold.
Terrorists blew up New York with airplanes? Make airport screeners federal employees. Create a new cabinet agency. Invade Iraq and Afghanistan.
To me, last week the electorate was not saying, "Yep, life was better when the Democrats were solving all our problems with new government programs." It was saying, "If the only choice is between honest statists and statists who lie about being for liberty and individual freedom, let's we choose the honest statists over the liars." Or at least that's what I'd have been saying if I had voted.
Some of us (me) were saying, "I've been disenfranchised by all of these lying bastards. Let's we figure out how to eke out a life despite the iron hand of the security forces looking over our shoulders with their arbitrary rules ready to strangle us if we act suspicious."
So. Statists to the left of us, and statists to the right. We're surrounded, in point of fact. What do we do about this?
Ignore them and they won't go away, but maybe if enough of us ignore them, they'll hold their breaths until they turn blue, not realizing that we won't bother to resusitate them if they do. At least that's in an ideal world. And this is not an ideal world.
The great liberty films of the last couple of years are Serenity and V for Vendetta. But they both have the same flaw, probably because otherwise the stories wouldn't fit in two hours: At crucial moments the totalitarians decide to "stand down." In real life they probably would gun down the liberty lovers.
What would happen if a horde of peaceful, unarmed people in V masks refused to stop marching toward a line of armed soldiers? In the movie the soldiers stand down. In India in the 1940s, they were slaughtered and won independence. In China at Tiananmen Square, they were just slaughtered. In the modern USA they are herded into "free speech zones" and ignored. Beats getting slaughtered, but the effect is the same: Dissent is silenced.
Like animals backed into corners, the impatient find themselves thinking about meeting the violence of the state with violence. But you can't shoot or bomb a nonviolent cooperative world into existence.
I find myself turning back to Mahatma Gandhi's morning mantra:
Let the first act of every morning be to make the following resolve for the day:
* I shall not fear anyone on Earth.
* I shall fear only God.
* I shall bear no ill will toward anyone.
* I shall not submit to injustice from anyone.
* I shall conquer untruth by truth.
* And in resisting untruth, I shall put up with all suffering.
Bottom line: Nonviolent resistance is going to hurt, but it's the only way to conquer untruth.
So. There's a bottom line. What next?
Let's if I can figure out what it means:
In each of the last four presidential elections, the winner was the one who said things like "The era of big government is over" and "I'm a Reagan Republican." You remember Reagan; he's the one who said, "In our present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government is the problem."
After each of the last four presidential elections, the winner turned to proving once again that actions speak louder than words. The era of big government did not end between 1993 and 2001, and since the self-proclaimed Reagan Republican took office, the proposed solution to our problem has been government time and time again.
Lousy schools? No Child Left Behind.
Prescription drug prices going nuts? Medicare Part D.
Stupid political ads on TV out of control? McCain-Feingold.
Terrorists blew up New York with airplanes? Make airport screeners federal employees. Create a new cabinet agency. Invade Iraq and Afghanistan.
To me, last week the electorate was not saying, "Yep, life was better when the Democrats were solving all our problems with new government programs." It was saying, "If the only choice is between honest statists and statists who lie about being for liberty and individual freedom, let's we choose the honest statists over the liars." Or at least that's what I'd have been saying if I had voted.
Some of us (me) were saying, "I've been disenfranchised by all of these lying bastards. Let's we figure out how to eke out a life despite the iron hand of the security forces looking over our shoulders with their arbitrary rules ready to strangle us if we act suspicious."
So. Statists to the left of us, and statists to the right. We're surrounded, in point of fact. What do we do about this?
Ignore them and they won't go away, but maybe if enough of us ignore them, they'll hold their breaths until they turn blue, not realizing that we won't bother to resusitate them if they do. At least that's in an ideal world. And this is not an ideal world.
The great liberty films of the last couple of years are Serenity and V for Vendetta. But they both have the same flaw, probably because otherwise the stories wouldn't fit in two hours: At crucial moments the totalitarians decide to "stand down." In real life they probably would gun down the liberty lovers.
What would happen if a horde of peaceful, unarmed people in V masks refused to stop marching toward a line of armed soldiers? In the movie the soldiers stand down. In India in the 1940s, they were slaughtered and won independence. In China at Tiananmen Square, they were just slaughtered. In the modern USA they are herded into "free speech zones" and ignored. Beats getting slaughtered, but the effect is the same: Dissent is silenced.
Like animals backed into corners, the impatient find themselves thinking about meeting the violence of the state with violence. But you can't shoot or bomb a nonviolent cooperative world into existence.
I find myself turning back to Mahatma Gandhi's morning mantra:
Let the first act of every morning be to make the following resolve for the day:
* I shall not fear anyone on Earth.
* I shall fear only God.
* I shall bear no ill will toward anyone.
* I shall not submit to injustice from anyone.
* I shall conquer untruth by truth.
* And in resisting untruth, I shall put up with all suffering.
Bottom line: Nonviolent resistance is going to hurt, but it's the only way to conquer untruth.
So. There's a bottom line. What next?
posted by B.W. Richardson at
8:18 AM
6 Comments:
Oh, look, Brian, it's an ignoramus.
You can delete the Ignoramus droppings, you know ... that tends to keep them from pooping here again.
Much as I believe in the First Amendment, I agree with the "delete" sentiment. Or see if there's a way to edit at least ...
Let's see-- I can post this as an anonymous blog person, since beta blogger won't let me post on Montag....
I just wanted to comment on what big spam you have.
~lewlew
Much as it pains me to shut down a poor deluded spambot, this third world hate nut overstayed his welcome a bit ...
... but for better or worse, I would have left his rant in place if he'd stopped at this:
2006 VOTERS REJECTED RELIGIOUS RIGHT CLERGY – USA VOTED FOR SECULAR POLITICS – by KALKI GAUR
Washington DC, Tuesday November 14, 2006, 8:30 AM. GOOD POLITICS Vs BAD RELIGION: American Voters in Election 2006 voted for Good Politics and rejected extremism fundamentalism intolerance of Bad Religion. American Voters rejected Religious Issues namely Pro-life, religious right conservatism, Papacy, Evangelicals. American Voters voted for political issues, namely rights of Iraq War, middle classes. American Voters declared politics of Catholic or Protestant religious right conservatism, is bad politics. American Voters voted that American politicians are morally better than religious clergy or priests riddled with allegations of pedophile priests and immoral clergy. It is a vote for American politics as good and rejection of American Church as bad. American voters like their fellow white European siblings have voted against the role of Christian Church, priests and clergy in American politics. American voters have rejected the agenda of Bolshevik Polish Pope John Paul II that sought to impose medievalism in American politics. America is finally free from the stranglehold of intolerant extremist fundamentalist Pope John Paul II, Christian Religious Conservative Conspiracy. American voters have spoken that Church, Religion, Clergy and Priests must not misuse the freedom of democracy to destroy the constitutional wall separating the State and Church in the United States. American voters have spoken that politics is for politicians not for clergy and church. America voted for 21st Century and rejected the conspiracy to take it back to Medieval Dark Ages.
KALKI GAUR
KALKI GAUR BLOGS
© 2006 Copyrights All Rights Reserved
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home