Nothing nice to say
"If you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all," moms have said, probably since the beginning of time. But isn't that the same thing as saying "Ignore it and it'll go away"? Not to argue with someone's mom, but sometimes you just have to point out unpleasant truths - otherwise the emperor will walk around naked and get away with it.
And what we have here is naked abuse of power and abandonment of the principles that led to a bunch of radicals usurping the British throne and setting up their own government a couple of centuries and a third ago. Oh, and while George W. Bush has taken full advantage of his opportunities, he didn't invent the concept.
The coming years are not going to be an improvement over the Bush II/Republican Congress years. Just as Bush I paved the way for Clinton and Clinton paved the way for Bush II, the assault on our liberties will continue "even with" Democrats controlling the federal government's two legislative houses - because Democrats had always been more likely than Republicans to think of the individual as subservient to the collective. Bush II's enhancement of the hive mentality in U.S. politics was merely to adapt it to a Republican agenda.
We will see more invasions of our privacy, more laws that go where no Founder of this nation ever intended the federal government to go, more laws that presume that the average citizen of this nation is a dolt who cannot think for himself or herself. This past week has seen the rulers of the city of New York presuming that the average citizen must be protected from the urge to consume trans fat, and that it is right and proper in a free society to pass laws to do so.
"If you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all." If tyranny slaps you in the face at every turn, is it "not nice" to point it out? And if you are surrounded by people who embrace tyranny and wish it on their neighbors and even on themselves, is it "not nice" to call it tyranny? The petty tyrants of the world don't think of themselves as tyrants, they think of it as protecting society. They think of it as promoting the common good. They think of it as homeland security.
In a private forum the other day, my friend Warren Bluhm wrote that "live and let live" is a basic American philosophy. He was writing in response to a guy who proposed that libertarianism is a quaint 18th century philosophy that doesn't translate well in the face of 21st century realities. Warren suggested the Republican "revolution" of 1994 and the Democratic victory of 2006 were won by the political party perceived as more libertarian that the other - that Democrats won this year because Republicans abandoned the cause of liberty as a priority.
But anyone who perceives that a Democratic Congress is more likely to pursue freedom and individual rights wasn't paying attention prior to 1994. A long, bumpy ride awaits ahead, something out of George Orwell's nightmares or the 1960s TV show The Prisoner. We are not numbers, we are free men and women, but the folks in charge - and many of our countrymen - don't believe that. Oh, they'll talk about freedom until the cows come home - but the thing is, the cows came home a long time ago, marched into their stalls and contentedly agreed to surrender their milk to the greater good in exchange for food and security. Or at least they thought that was the agreement. Let one of them stop giving milk, and see what happens to her security. I do love ribeye steak ...
And what we have here is naked abuse of power and abandonment of the principles that led to a bunch of radicals usurping the British throne and setting up their own government a couple of centuries and a third ago. Oh, and while George W. Bush has taken full advantage of his opportunities, he didn't invent the concept.
The coming years are not going to be an improvement over the Bush II/Republican Congress years. Just as Bush I paved the way for Clinton and Clinton paved the way for Bush II, the assault on our liberties will continue "even with" Democrats controlling the federal government's two legislative houses - because Democrats had always been more likely than Republicans to think of the individual as subservient to the collective. Bush II's enhancement of the hive mentality in U.S. politics was merely to adapt it to a Republican agenda.
We will see more invasions of our privacy, more laws that go where no Founder of this nation ever intended the federal government to go, more laws that presume that the average citizen of this nation is a dolt who cannot think for himself or herself. This past week has seen the rulers of the city of New York presuming that the average citizen must be protected from the urge to consume trans fat, and that it is right and proper in a free society to pass laws to do so.
"If you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all." If tyranny slaps you in the face at every turn, is it "not nice" to point it out? And if you are surrounded by people who embrace tyranny and wish it on their neighbors and even on themselves, is it "not nice" to call it tyranny? The petty tyrants of the world don't think of themselves as tyrants, they think of it as protecting society. They think of it as promoting the common good. They think of it as homeland security.
In a private forum the other day, my friend Warren Bluhm wrote that "live and let live" is a basic American philosophy. He was writing in response to a guy who proposed that libertarianism is a quaint 18th century philosophy that doesn't translate well in the face of 21st century realities. Warren suggested the Republican "revolution" of 1994 and the Democratic victory of 2006 were won by the political party perceived as more libertarian that the other - that Democrats won this year because Republicans abandoned the cause of liberty as a priority.
But anyone who perceives that a Democratic Congress is more likely to pursue freedom and individual rights wasn't paying attention prior to 1994. A long, bumpy ride awaits ahead, something out of George Orwell's nightmares or the 1960s TV show The Prisoner. We are not numbers, we are free men and women, but the folks in charge - and many of our countrymen - don't believe that. Oh, they'll talk about freedom until the cows come home - but the thing is, the cows came home a long time ago, marched into their stalls and contentedly agreed to surrender their milk to the greater good in exchange for food and security. Or at least they thought that was the agreement. Let one of them stop giving milk, and see what happens to her security. I do love ribeye steak ...
posted by B.W. Richardson at
7:32 AM
2 Comments:
Republicans did lose, cause we lost the libertarian-oriented voter with stupid actions like that idiotic Internet Gaming Ban. I think Rudy can win back libertarian-minded voters in 2008. But hardcore Libertarians will remain skeptical.
Libertarian Republican Presidentil preference poll now up at www.mainstreamlibertarian.com
Thought-provoking post, B.W. ... My mom did indeed pass along that bit of wisdom, and I've tried (not always succeeded) to heed it. However, I believe she included a small phrase which makes all the difference: "If you have nothing nice to say about someone, don't say anything at all." I took this to mean something like, "Be a grownup - don't air your private 'dirty laundry' involving others."
"If you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all." If tyranny slaps you in the face at every turn, is it "not nice" to point it out? And if you are surrounded by people who embrace tyranny and wish it on their neighbors and even on themselves, is it "not nice" to call it tyranny?
There's a huge difference between saying something nasty (whether warranted or not) about some individual and identifying the fundamental nature of some system. Similarly, there's a big difference between attacking an idea and attacking a person.
I'm not saying that one shouldn't ever call a person on some bad idea he or she holds, or some action they've taken that initiated force. Bush and Co. certainly deserve to be identified as the antithesis of liberty-loving individuals worldwide, and held accountable for their tyrannical actions. The scale of publicity (to use a rough term) should roughly equal how public the proposed or actual tyranny is.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home