Ever noticed that election after election seems to present you with increasingly similar choices? How many times have you found yourself explaining to another person that it’s important that we vote for the “lesser of two evils”? Is this really true? If so, where does a continual path of decisions for lesser evils eventually end? Are you truly satisfied with your answer? Is this really as good as it gets?
I recently stumbled across another video that helps better describe the problem. I think the allegory is nearly perfect. Welcome to The Diner From Hell:
The natural question to this obvious problem is, “OK, what do you recommend? Can you think of anything better?”
Sure I can. In fact, it would resemble post-colonial America when people were free to govern themselves, rather than “vote” for the above-the-law dictator du jour.
What were some of the differences between the times of our nation’s founding and today?
Well, one big difference was that permission was generally not needed for free commerce—and I think you’ll find that nearly everything hinges on this particular freedom. Some people are still under the illusion that we have free trade today, but in fact we have nothing close to free trade and commerce. For instance, consider that every transaction you make is subject to taxation—with the IRS apparently wanting to know about even your barter transactions!* Back to my point. Because of this insatiable need to tax every transaction you ever make, our public servants decided that—for your own good, mind you, and backed with the full force of our military police—you must have a Social Security number, by which all transactions can be either limited or tracked. You cannot open a bank account without a Social Security number, and you cannot reasonably conduct clearings of transactions (like cashing and issuing checks) without a bank account. And you cannot engage in any sort of free commerce without the capacity to exchange money freely. Ironically, the only thing I’ve ever seen from Social Security (or am likely ever to see) is a demand that I put in ~15% of all my earnings and tracking of all transactions according to my Social Security number. Nice. Still think we have free trade here?
No free trade. How about equality before the law, the concept that regardless of socioeconomic status, everyone is equal in the eyes of the law? Nope. In fact, we see that some people are more equal than others. If you recall, during the financial melt-down of fraud, kick-backs, and other forms of bribery back in 2007/8, none of those responsible for such crimes went to jail. Neither did Jon Corzine, who remains a non-indicted free man, despite giving no account for ~$1.2 – $1.6 billion dollars in stolen savings from the segregated accounts of customers at MF Global. Neither has Eric Holder, who has been found to be in contempt of Congress for refusing to provide subpoenaed documents in the flagrantly illegal Fast and Furious scandal. Neither has Lois Lerner of the IRS for illegally targeting convenient political opponents with the force of the IRS. And these are just recent examples. In fact, it seems that ever since bribery has become unofficially legal, so has inequality before the law become unofficially sanctioned. One person commits a crime and gets a promotion and lifetime pension, while another commits exactly the same crime and gets thrown in prison for life. Still think we have the rule of law—and not men—in the land of the formerly free?
Well, if we don’t have free trade or equality under the law, how can we possibly have the freedom to elect our public servants? Think that through. This is the open destruction of the rights of private property, as well as the open destruction of any semblance of justice. By the government. And as I’ve said many times in the past, the only legitimate purpose of the government is to protect the liberties of its citizens! If they fail to do this, they fail in their only possible legitimacy and usefulness to a free people. And when they have lost legitimacy, it’s impossible to claim they are of, by, and for the people, nor that they have the consent of the governed. All is parasitic usurpation. The American Revolution was fought for less than what we now see in the daily news. (Truly. Read the Declaration of Independence.)
So I ask again. How’s that “democracy” working for you?
*Ever trade some baseball cards for a shotgun at a garage sale? The IRS seems to see that not as a net balanced transaction, but as a net gain, and they want a piece of that gain. They think the same of the other party in that transaction, which is a fraudulent claim, of course, since both parties cannot come away from such a barter transaction with a net gain. If that were true, the way to become rich would be to simply repeat that trade over and over all day, every day.