Brain Fertilizer

I realize that the language I use normally in talking about the ideology I support vs. that with which I disagree tends to demonize my ideological opponents. It's not so much that I don't like the people...I tend to like almost every person I know, and I actively try to find things to like about people. It's more that I cannot support their premises, their logic, and their conclusions. I use strong language because...because I feel strongly about the issue, I guess. Part of it is that while I do recognize shades of gray, I think you need to clearly delineate the results when they are more black or more white. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions, and the ends do not justify the means, and so if I state in strong and in no uncertain terms what I expect the fruits of liberal/left/Democrat ideology to be, then when those results appear, I have made it clear I will brook no equivocation about how those results came to be.

But in musing this evening, I think I stumbled across a patch of common ground. And this common ground also helps make the difference between my views and libertarian much more stark.

Libertarians say that the government that governs least, governs best. I absolutely disagree, because there certainly is a point at which government no longer governs enough...and since that point will be subjective, libertarianism will always flirt with anarchy. I cannot support this.

What is government, then?

A new definition occurred to me tonight. In the absence of government, the strong exploit the weak. Government helps extend strength to the weak, helps to protect the weak. Government should speak for those who have no voice.

Government is a gathering of power. It gathers this power from the strength of individuals. Unfortunately, if the power gathers too compactly in a single individual or small group, then the government has betrayed its purpose, because the strong will once again exploit the weak. There is no such thing as a benevolent dictatorship, because power does corrupt.

Liberals see Big Business as being too strong, as exploiting the weak. They have a point. Monopolies and unfair business practices do exploit our desire for material comfort and wealth, often to our detriment. Liberals also seem to fear a strong America, and again, for good reason: we have exploited smaller nations, and conquered peoples for selfish reasons.

Obviously, despite a generally benevolent system of government, the strong still exploit the weak. Some people still have no one to speak for them. Our nation is large and diverse, and the needs of an individual sometimes get lost in the hubbub of the nearly 300 million voices.

Again, to be fair, the conservative side looks at this and shrugs. Most successful people do so because of strength, and they expect that anyone with strength of will and strength of character and strength of will can duplicate their success. The right/conservative population is not exclusive, as the left would insist; in fact, conservatives will accept anyone, of any race, religion, color, creed, religion. Conservatives are far more inclusive than liberals...but we do exclude those who do not exercise their strength on their own behalf. Like a mother bird nudging the chicks from the nest, we demand that you fly, or be disowned. It is heartless, to a point, but it is also far less heartless than preventing the chick from trying to fly to spare it possible harm.

And so, the liberal answer to preventing the strong from exploiting the weak seems to be making everyone weak. Tax the rich back into the middle class. Establish systematic descrimination on the basis of racism to prevent anyone from being rewarded merely for excellence, and the very real result is you prevent excellence from being reached. Disarm the populace, so that no one can stand up to the government. Make the government itself the tool for making everyone weak. Make the nation weak among all the nations, so that we cannot act on our own and accidentally exploit a weaker nation. Furthermore, work to make all other nations weak, so that we all must huddle together for mutual defense against those few that refuse to be weakened. Drag everyone down. Lower standards. Erase morality. Condemn any religion that urges self-development. Water down any religion that cannot be condemned by discarding clear teachings of morality (pro-choice, pro-SSM Catholics are truly schizophrenic). Discourage self-reliance and personal responsibility, because they help strengthen character and resolve.

I'm sure most of it is subconscious, actually. The words used to support liberal platforms sound good: no child should ever go hungry. No one should ever die because they couldn't afford the drugs. The problem is that the broad and institutional attempts to rectify individual problems invariably result in fraud, corruption, sloth, greed, and further exploitation. It doesn't protect the weak, it just reclassifies them.

I guess I am wandering right now. I can see the limitations of the conservative view, I detest the inherent problems of liberalism and socialism, and shake my head in disbelief that anyone can seriously espouse libertarianism.

My solution would be to restructure the government. We need a few more checks and balances to prevent the judicial activism we've seen over the last few years. But most of all we need to look again at our whole system of government in view of some of the problems we have. We need a governmental system whose main objective is to prevent the strong exploiting the weak. Surely that can be done. Surely there is another Thomas Paine among us who can convince everyone to look the same direction. Surely there are more George Washingtons, Thomas Jeffersons, John and Samual Adams, Madisons, Monroes...

We need to find them and urge them to work on a new Constitution. We need to revitalize our government, and renew our commitment to protecting the weak. And I don't just mean the weak within the United States. Our unprecedented wealth, strength, technology, drive, and freedom must be applied to protecting the weak across the entire globe. Not all at once, of course; and the highest priority should be Americans, perhaps. But we must do it. We are not truly free if someone is under the thumb of tyranny. We are not truly wealthy if someone is living in institutional poverty (note the most important word of that phrase: institutional).

For now, though, the best thing we can do is remain strong. Own weapons. Improve yourself. Hold yourself to high moral standards. Teach your children to do the same, and also to not judge those who do not. Be an example.

Be strong.