Some time back, I posted a Leftist false equivalency meme, along with my editorial comment. This stirred up a small bit of controversy. The responding comments were polite and only mildly pugnacious, which is greatly appreciated. To the friends of friends who commented, I have to say that I almost admire the chutzpah required to barge uninvited onto a total stranger’s page, in order to engage in smug, self-righteous moralizing.
Addressing the comments in no particular order, I was asked when I’m going to start paying out-of-pocket for the roads I use, and the police, fire and military protection I enjoy, since I’m opposed to Socialism. Under our current system, roads are paid for via license and registration fees, gasoline taxes and highway tolls. As a car owner and driver, I AM paying for the roads. That said, the idea that there would be no roads without government and taxation is absurd. We had roads before we paid for them with tax dollars, funded by private enterprise. Why? Because the businessmen knew that it was in their best interests, to be able to get their goods to market efficiently. The Panama Canal was largely privately funded, because JP Morgan and other business leaders knew that a shortcut between the Atlantic and Pacific would be an economic boon. So, the contention that there would be no infrastructure without government doesn’t bear up to close scrutiny.
As for the police and fire departments and the military, protecting the lives and property of the citizenry is a legitimate function of government, without a redistributive aspect. I am not paying for something without receiving the benefit of it (This is also true of roads). The US military protects the entire country, not just one or two segments of the population. Just because something is taxpayer funded, it’s not ipso facto Socialistic. Nice try, though.
Most of the comments on the thread were anecdotal stories of the struggles the commenters or members of their families faced when dealing with a severe illness. This will probably come as a shock to most of you, but we are in agreement that the healthcare system needs reform. We are in further agreement that the biggest problems in the system are greed and corruption at the top. Where we differ is on how to solve the problems.
To those on the Left, the solution is the same as their solution to every social problem; throw more government at it. If we just tax, legislate, and regulate enough, it’ll all work out. Trouble is, it hasn’t worked so far. My response? Here’s an idea just crazy enough to work. Lets throw Capitalism at the healthcare problem. I know what you’re thinking; “It’s already Capitalistic. Healthcare is for profit, and everything!” Except that while healthcare is currently a for profit enterprise, it’s not Capitalistic. There’s no free market, you see.
A Capitalist healthcare system would work something like this; You have an illness that you’d like to get treated. A doctor has the skills to treat your illness. You and the doctor negotiate terms, and you get your treatment. The transaction is voluntary, and both parties benefit. No middlemen, no coercion. No, the system as it currently exists is a Corporatist, almost Fascistic model.
The funny thing about Fascism is that it’s been used as a pejorative for so long-as in, “Anyone who disagrees with me, is a Fascist”, that people have forgotten that it’s an actual economic philosophy, and a Leftist one, at that (sorry, Progressives, but facts are facts). Fascism comes from the Latin word Fasces, meaning a bundle of sticks. It was coined in the 1930s by Benito Mussolini, when he was laying out his vision for Italy. The idea was, that while individual sticks could be broken, if they were bundled together, they’d be invincible.
In a Fascist economy, businesses would still be privately owned, but the market would be controlled by the government, through wage and price controls, laws, regulations and taxes. Companies that enjoyed the government’s favor would prosper. Those that didn’t, would whither and die, under regulatory and tax costs that they could never afford. Essentially, every store would be a Wal-Mart, every restaurant would be a McDonald’s.
This is why top-down, Big Government solutions never work. The thing that is most conducive to corruption is the centralization of power. Everyone-and I mean everyone-has a little bit of larceny in their soul. At one time or another, we’ve all lied, cheated or stolen. When you’re protected by your connections, from the consequences of exercising that larceny, You’ll become corrupt. History is replete with examples (I’ll leave it to you to find your own examples, it should only take a few seconds on Google).
Our brilliant Founding Fathers were among other things, students of history. they knew of the potential for evil which exists in all of humanity. That’s why they designed the government that they did. With checks and balances, with limits on power and influence. As I’ve stated before, even the Electoral College exists to prevent the Tyranny of the Majority (AKA Mob Rule).
Never forget that bureaucracies exist for but one reason; to self-perpetuate. They’ll never solve a problem, because if the problem is ever solved, we won’t need them anymore. I implore you, my friends; Stop looking for Government solutions. Look to your friends, your families, your communities, and yes, your churches. Look to yourself! Throw off your shackles of dependency! Reclaim your birthright as free men and women! The American experiment in self-government is not over. The Republic’s not quite dead, yet. We just need to remember who we are.
E Pluribus Unum. Out of Many, One. What we have in common is greater than what separates us. We don’t need bureaucrats, functionaries and apparatchiks, or even elected politicians to look out for us, we can look after ourselves, and each other. That’s what America is all about.
3 replies on “America’s Not Dead, Yet”
Poignant and true.
Good job, Bud! Have you ever considered putting together a list of all the leftist tropes, and our answers to them? It would be part and parcel of establishing a coherent, concise one-stop reference as to what us “wingnuts” are all about.
Instead of just telling them they’re wrong, we should strive to explain why they are wrong. If they can find the attention span, that is.
I hadn’t up till now, but it sounds like a great idea. Thanks!