The primary election looms large in the window, also known as the general election in one-party Elbert County. Along with the wild flowers, commissioner candidate sales pitches are in full throated bloom.
Some of the selling centers on constitutional fundamentals, statesmanship, limited government – the conservative basket of principles. This language sounds so tautologically wonderful, airtight, and it really appeals to students of history and traditional idealists.
Other selling focusses more on modern management methods and the myth that the most desirable future is already known today, so plans must be written into law to force Elbert County citizens to comply with the Vision.
Still other selling advises we shuck all that highbrow theoretical buncombe and take a flyer on someone unconventional because, well, just because it might be better that way.
None of it will pan out, because none of it has ever panned out, and it’s all been done many times before. Politics is an art of make-believe practiced one step ahead of the voting rubes. Some parties practice politics one step ahead of the law too, but since politicians can change laws, this usually doesn’t present much of a problem.
History’s rule book tells us that laws, statutes, codifications, master plans, and judicial opinions, rarely get repealed or overturned, despite how poorly they anticipate future human behavior, or how much they end up costing. Politicians and judges rarely get impeached, despite poor decisions made. Ministerial immunity rarely gets penetrated, despite negligent and reckless actions. And statesmanship founded in principles enumerated in the Declaration of Independence rarely compels behavior in the face of exigent pragmatic considerations.
Candidate “puffing” – sales pitches – make bubbles that will burst. More puffing means bigger bubbles, but they all burst in time.
Those who voted for the plan will discover that the plan didn’t work. Those who voted for the principles will look long and hard to find any evidence of them in practice. Those who voted for change will discover the same old thing. Those who voted for the entitlements will discover that it wasn’t nearly enough to alleviate their needs. Those who voted for limiting government will discover that the corrupting influence of power proved too much for any man to resist.
The systemic problems we add to the complexity of life by propagating this pointless political overhead suck the life out of our society, to no good end. The only rational response to it all is to not further enable it.
Please, commissioner candidates, don’t do us any favors. Don’t promise to make plans for us, be they masterful or otherwise. Your predecessors have made too much mess with plans for us already. Don’t promise to make Elbert County more effective so it can collect more taxes and haul in more revenue from the citizens. We citizens already think government hauls in too much from us. Don’t promise to get along with each other so that the commission can agree on doing more to the citizens of Elbert County. We don’t want you to do more. We want you to do less to us. Don’t promise us more government. We want less government – the exact opposite of what most of you were promising.
As true today as in 1849 when first penned, “That government is best which governs least…”, Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience.
After viewing the Youtube vids from the multi-party commissioner candidate forum the other night, with all of the promises, plans, accusations, and elucidations, you’re all courting power, evidently imagining yourselves qualified to dictate to other people indistinguishable from yourselves.
I can imagine who told you this is what Elbert County needs and wants – the usual pro-planning, pro-government, country-in-county, NIMBY, something-for-nothing, folks who publish our local fishwraps, who think grant money is the route to profitability, who work daily to keep Elbert County stuck in the last century.
Elbert County is beautiful. But it’s also a wasteland with no viable economy and no affordable means for people to make a contribution to the modern world. That’s the legacy I heard most of you promise to uphold the other night.
Surely Elbert County could do more for the modern world than be a bedroom community for public employees, retired and punching coupons, or still employed by a public agency of some sort. In most other parts of the world, people actually have to make a contribution to society to survive.
I’m waiting for one of you commissioner candidates to promise to not sustain the Potemkin Village of Elbert County.
“Often contradictory in his views on atheism and religion, Rousseau nevertheless was certain of one thing: that the State should be the final arbiter of the human condition, in the name of something he called the General Will. Only the State, he thought, could make postlapsarian man well again. One can practically smell the fascism coming off his pages, all in the name of compassion, of course. No wonder his more perceptive contemporaries, including Voltaire, considered him a monster.
Many others, however, were greatly influenced by him, including most of the great monsters of the twentieth century. Without Rousseau, Marx is unthinkable; without Marx, Lenin is unthinkable; without Lenin, Stalin is unthinkable, without Stalin, Mao is unthinkable; without Mao, Ho Chi Minh and Pol Pot are unthinkable.”
Michael Walsh, “The Devil’s Pleasure Palace,” 2015, p. 137-8.
I don’t see the malice in Trump that so many on both the Right and Left keep spinning up. Can Trump undo some of the damage to America that Obama committed? That’s the hope, though it’s probably too much to expect from one man. But meanwhile, the Left continue to promote malice to some under the excuse of favoritism to others. Sure, higher standards exist for choosing a President, but if frogs could fly they wouldn’t bump their asses hopping on the ground.
“Its pretensions to “comprehensitivity” destroyed, we can now see this “system” as a form of intellectual charlatanism, a studied fascination with process and minutiae that bespeaks the true soul of the born bureaucrat–the man who does nothing in particular, and to no societal good, but who by his own lights does it very well.”
The context of the above writing is not county politics, political appointments, school boards, citizen committees, or similar local governing bodies that folks–so eerily described above–zealously seek out and set aside for themselves each year in Elbert County.
How many times have you heard one of them hold forth on how hard they, or one in their cohort, works in the power role they’ve secured?
Do they expect us to believe that obsessive protection of their local offices somehow disproves the corrupting influence of power?
“The context and subtext contain the real message. This is true on both sides of today’s political battles. On the one side, we have the remnants–scratched and bleeding, but still partially cohesive–of the old American Christian cultures, largely Protestant but with a strong admixture of Catholics; on the other is the far less numerous but culturally potent Unholy Left, adhering to its own secular religion, although it professes atheism. As with the battle between radical Islam and the West, one side has explicitly avowed war on the other, while the other, more powerful, refuses to acknowledge it or even conceive of it. Which side, under these circumstances, is more likely to be successful?”
Michael Walsh, “The Devil’s Pleasure Palace,” 2015, p. 115.
Cool tool: http://electioninsights.mybluemix.net/#/
Graph adjustable from 1 to 250 subjects (bottom slider), and 1 minute to 1 week (top slider). Note how much better Trump is doing this past week than Hillary.
Memo to #nevertrumpsters: If conservative principles are so precious that they provide justification to subject the country to openly Leftist government, I should think those principles need more context and perspective.
“What evidence is there that there is an arc of history and that it bends in any particular direction? One would think that the Unholy Left would be the last to assert such a grand pattern, given their disbelief in the Deity. Whence comes this “arc”? Who created it? Where did its moral impulse toward “justice” come from? What is “justice” anyway, and who decides? And if the word “justice” bears a bien-pensant modifier (as in “environmental justice”), the only “justice” is likely to be the “justice” of revenge. The word “justice,” in the hands of the Left, has come to mean pretty much any policy goal they desire.
None of this matters, however, when the purpose of the assertion is not to offer an argument but to shut down the opposition via the timely employment of unimpeachable buzzwords and to advance a political agenda that has little or nothing to do with the terms employed for its advancement. Indeed, martial metaphors, not moralistic catchphrases, are the key to understanding the modern Left and its “scientific” dogma of Critical Theory: Theirs is a Hobbesian war of all against all (bellum omnum contra omnes), of every man’s hand against every other man’s. As Orwell, who knew a thing or two about the intellectual fascism of the Left, wrote in 1984: “War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.” These three aphorisms are the official slogans of the Ministry of Truth in 1984, and the truth is whatever the Ministry says it is. Truth is malleable and fungible, a function of day and date. The Devil will say what he has to say and will quote such scripture as he requires in order to achieve the sole objective remaining to him: the ruination of Man and his consignment to Hell.”
Michael Walsh, The Devil’s Pleasure Palace, 2015, pp. 52-53.
It was passing strange when Ken Buck represented the 1% of Colorado citizens who attend Republican caucuses as 40% of all voters yesterday (4/11/16) on the Mark Levin show. Stranger still that Levin went right along with the charade that unelected caucus attendees represent the voters. I lost count of the number of times he echoed the 40% of all voters myth.
I have to separate my respect for Levin’s constitutional analysis from my disgust over his knee jerk support for the non-representative caucus system.
When will the Colorado GOP figure out that they cannot claim legitimacy because a minuscule minority of them show up at a meeting once every two years? Legitimacy comes from the consent of all the voters, not a self-selected few.
The hypocrisy of upholding the values of accountability and personal responsibility when talking about the failings of other people, but practicing an unrepresentative form of politics by local-loud-mouth, completely undermines their cause.
- I’m waiting for the politician who doesn’t promise me, or anyone else, anything.
- I’m waiting for the politician who doesn’t use my idealism to advance them self.
- I’m waiting for the politician who doesn’t try to pull an emotional response from me.
- I’m waiting for the politician who is known for the laws they repealed.
- I’m waiting for the politician who has no pitch, and who is not a salesman.
- I’m waiting for the politician who does not seek political office.
- I’m waiting for the politician who takes no satisfaction from governance.
- I’m waiting for the politician who admits the evil nature of power in them self.
Same old stuff, different day – and you thought I was going to use the more accurate word.
Click on ’em, resize ’em to your browser, read ’em ‘n weep.
To summarize, in the name of the inalienable rights of liberty and property, the laudable purposes of safety and general welfare, and the myth of mother Gaia, the Left would lard up the Colorado constitution with collectivist abrogations of the inalienable rights of liberty and property, would decrease safety and general welfare, and would empower local Leftist apparatchiks to dominate their subjects – us – with impunity.
I don’t like being a subject. I suggest that Colorado citizens vote against becoming subjects by rejecting these Leftist initiatives. Don’t we have too much totalitarianism already?
One more thing…
The best thing for the citizens of Elbert County that you could do with the referenced grant money would be to dismantle and destroy the regulatory planning law and its appurtenant bodies that have caused so much harm to Elbert County in the form of foregone economic activity and the elimination of economic potential.
Faced with overwhelming evidence that markets “work,” Obama’s advice is to go on searching for “what works.” => Denial on stilts.
On the one hand we have an ongoing food-fight egged on by the media who only ask questions about the food-fight, and never follow any thread about substantive solutions to the worlds problems.
On the other hand, a serene and respectful candidate discussion about fantasy subjects that have never worked is encouraged, with a reality reduced to simplistic emotions for the least common denominator of voter, and a fawning media who never follow up on any problem in the world remotely connected to their simplisticism.
The real adversary in this election is television media; CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS & FOX.
This presidential race illuminates just how far out of the bottle the genie has gone. Peel back the layers of President and Congress to reveal the massive federal, state, county, local, and special district bureaucracies – the envy of any socialist utopian – that forge ahead relentlessly to define and manage every corporeal and theoretical element about America and her people.
The electoral theater is in season, with many acts, many intermissions, and incessant analysis – all of it tracking to the myth of the constitutional consent of the governed. As if!!!
As if any one man (a President), or any consortium of men (a Congress) could even know what the American bureaucratic Leviathan does to us each minute of every day.
As if the millions of lines of written rules by all manner of governing body in America – a.k.a. The Rule of Law – could even be comprehended in any significant degree.
We are subjects to bureaucrats discretion now. Our consent is vestigial. Our Constitution is open to interpretation and we have no control over the interpreters.
These flourishes at the margin where individuals step into the limelight for a few moments to plant seeds of hope in the fertile soil of our founding ideology, just remind me of what will never be a reality for us again.
To get America back, the bureaucracy must be dismembered, amputated, discarded. There is no mending it. The people who recognize that truth are vastly outnumbered.
And that’s the nuts and bolts of it. All the rest – the ideological fights, the religious fights, the rights fights, the wealth fights, the health fights, the cultural fights, they’re all sideshows. Constant distractions to divert attention from the one hand in your pocket, and the other one wrapped around your spinal cord.
Going to caucus? Please….
Justice Scalia’s death is a litmus test for the nation. Everyone who justifies their position on the proper course of action for the President and the Senate to fill Scalia’s seat on the Court with an appeal to the will of the people is wrong. America was never intended to be governed by a political expression of the will of the people.
Justice Scalia fought an uphill battle to preserve the rule of law, not the rule of men. He agreed with the Framers that Constitutional law should only be changed with the safeguards of the amendment process in order to avoid judicial tyranny. But this process is far too slow for the Left who see the Court as the architect of social engineering in America.
That concept – social engineering – is the very antithesis of freedom. It makes lab rats out of free men. It just amazes me to see the Left, who are all so libertarian about their behavioral choices, chuck their free will aside and line up to conform with the latest politically correct gestalt.
And if it were only that, I could grudgingly accept it. But no. They’re driven to make law to govern and force me to accept their experiments too. And that’s where I draw the line – because I don’t sell my freedom cheaply. I expect to be persuaded and convinced, and the Left, generally, don’t make compelling arguments.
“It seems to me that that is where we are heading, or perhaps even where we have arrived. Seventy-five years ago, we believed firmly enough in a rock-solid, unchanging Constitution that we felt it necessary to adopt the Nineteenth Amendment to give women the vote. The battle was not fought in the courts, and few thought that it could be, despite the constitutional guarantee of Equal Protection of the Laws; that provision did not, when it was adopted, and hence did not in 1920, guarantee equal access to the ballot but permitted distinctions on the basis not only of age but of property and of sex. Who can doubt that if the issue had been deferred until today, the Constitution would be (formally) unamended, and the courts would be the chosen instrumentality of change? The American people have been converted to belief in The Living Constitution, a “morphing” document that means, from age to age, what it ought to mean. And with that conversion has inevitably come the new phenomenon of selecting and confirming federal judges, at all levels, on the basis of their views regarding a whole series of proposals for constitutional evolution. If the courts are free to write the Constitution anew, they will, by God, write it the way the majority wants; the appointment and confirmation process will see to that. This, of course, is the end of the Bill of Rights, whose meaning will be committed to the very body it was meant to protect against: the majority. By trying to make the Constitution do everything that needs doing from age to age, we shall have caused it to do nothing at all.”