Republican or Democrat?
I’ve been saying for many years now that there is no appreciable difference between the two major political parties in the US. It’s a lot like Hot Dogs. You can choose the non kosher Hot Dogs or you can choose the kosher Hot Dogs but is there any real difference? In reality they’re both bad for you but somehow you feel a little better about the one labelled Kosher right? I’m pretty certain that if you tried to live on either one the result would be the same. You’d eventually get sick and your health would deteriorate until you finally expire. Choosing Republicans and Democrats has seemingly led us down the same path. The nation is sick and may soon expire as the people continue to choose the Republican kosher hot dogs or the Democratic non kosher hot dogs. They both say what their constituents want to hear during the campaign but once they’re in office the result will undoubtedly be a severe case of indigestion.
This is exactly what we now have with our two party system. Sure, there are other parties but the current system has been designed to keep any of them from having a real chance to compete. The Establishment of both parties has very effectively kept all third party contenders from ever being contenders. And with the media as their accomplices the American public have been led to believe that their participation in this charade really makes a difference.
I believe most people would agree that Ronald Reagan was probably the most conservative, small government president we’ve had in the last 30 to 50 years, maybe even longer and yet, under Reagan, the budget and the size of government grew. In other words, despite the pre-election rhetoric the facts tell a different story. The concept of limited government, balanced budgets, paying off the national debt and restoring liberty and the Constitution goes out the window before the new President says his “I Do” swearing to uphold and defend said Constitution.
Why does anyone, at this point, think that electing anyone from either party will change anything? With every new election promises are made and then they are broken. People expect their elected officials to do stuff for them and they are more than happy to do things for them and therein lies the problem. The people keep electing politicians that will do things for them when what they need, if they want to keep their liberty and maintain their freedom, is to elect people who tell them they won’t do anything for them. I would argue that even if the only job of the Federal government was to “secure our liberty” we are at once in danger of losing it. Once you ask the government to do something for you, you have ask to be enslaved and that’s exactly what American citizens have become. Americans have enslaved themselves and unfortunately until there’s a complete collapse and people experience real pain nothing will change.
So what is the answer? Well in this blogger’s opinion the Libertarian position of which, Jefferson, Madison and a few others were inclined, is the answer. Most people do not understand true Libertarian philosophy and have therefore dismissed it just as they have Anarcho-Capitalism. If people hope to enjoy maximum freedom and peace I would encourage everyone to do some serious research before dismissing libertarian principles.
Let The Pain Come
Once the almighty dollar has collapsed and we’re all living under Martial Law hopefully people come to realize there must be a better way. Even though the US constitution was created as document meant to secure the liberty and freedom of the people, it was flawed. I’m not saying that a libertarian society would not have problems or that it would be some Utopia and there are no real libertarians that purport such nonsense, even though they are accused of such by dissenters. However, the primary libertarian principle of Non-Aggression and others is much preferred over any other earthly social system I’ve encountered. Rothbard, who is considered by many libertarians to be one of the best if not the best authority on libertarian philosophy says this:
The libertarian creed rests upon one central axiom: that no man or group of men may aggress against the person or property of anyone else. This may be called the “nonaggression axiom.” “Aggression” is defined as the initiation of the use or threat of physical violence against the person or property of anyone else. Aggression is therefore synonymous with invasion.
How any thinking person can have any disagreement with such a principle is beyond me. I’d venture to say that the only people that oppose libertarianism are those who have not done their homework but rather have listened to what others, who have also not done their due diligence, have said about it. The consistency of libertarian philosophy is unparalleled in my opinion. It’s so logical and well reasoned that, as far as I’m concerned, those who oppose it are so thoroughly brain-washed and devoid of critical thinking skills that they’re probably hopeless or maybe they just enjoy violence and slavery.
So if you think the things are going to change if we just get the right Republican or Democrat into the right office, I’d like to know what you’ve been smoking because that formula has so obviously failed. One would have to have lost all their faculties of reason to believe such a fairy tale.
