By Glen Allport
July 15, 2011
PART 2
HOW THE IDEA OF CIVIL SOCIETY WAS
DESTROYED
In the second half of the 1800s, the nascent civil society in the United States, with its classical liberal worldview ~ including the understanding that society should embody both liberty and compassion ~ began giving way to the modern Left and Right.
Lack of compassion (or widespread
emotional damage, if you prefer) and the continued use of aggression, in and
out of government, meant that the trend toward civil society in America was
delicate to start with. Adoption of the Constitution was a serious blow in this
regard, creating as it did a glowing ember of central, coercive authority which
grew into the raging tyranny we now seek, vainly, to bring under control.
This dramatic and toxic growth of
the State did not happen by accident.
The ongoing triumph of the coercive elite has been, first, to implant in the public mind a corrupted version of the Non-Aggression Principle, one that only applies to the little people.
Expressed as it might be written
for an Eleventh Commandment (which is certainly how the establishment treats
it), this version might read:
"Thou shalt not aggress against others, unless thou worketh for the State."
Second, this
corrupted NAP was supported by shrewdly recasting the two elements of the
Golden Rule as opposing each
other and forever at war. Love and freedom were no longer seen as the mutually
supportive qualities that they are, but rather as competing forces engaged in a
zero-sum
struggle.
Those two epic misunderstandings
underpin the toxic paradigm of
political Left and Right. Under the new Commandment, both Left and Right
are granted use of State aggression in service of their goals.
Indeed, the State is nothing but aggression; it is an institution based on force, threats of force, and fraud.
Try saying "no" to the
State at any level and watch the aggression harden from "violence in a
latent state" (as classical liberal Auberon Herbert put it) to actual
violence administered by "big men with guns."
America's founding generation
understood this, but not well enough. George Washington famously pointed out
that
"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence; it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master."
Still, Washington was a believer
in coercive government, as long as it was small and "restrained."
Well, we've seen how THAT worked
out.
The Left/Right political paradigm
inevitably leads to tyranny
because both sides embrace aggression
in service of their goals, and because each side over-emphasizes one half of
the Love and Freedom duality – always a dangerous path.
In theory, the Left focuses on
compassion; the Right on limited government ~ on "restrained
aggression," in other words, rather than on non-aggression. But, even aside from the aggression involved, neither Left nor Right can ever be a healthy
whole by itself, because both love and freedom are equally necessary.
Like a deprived child who grows
into an adult who can never get enough,* the
public is constantly dissatisfied with the results of political action and so
always wants more. This is partly because government policies and programs do the opposite of their stated aims and
partly because any action that leads to over-emphasis of one side of the
Duality while under-serving the other must
create imbalance and lead to discontent.
* . . . never enough of money, sex, power, or whatever, because the person never got enough of what they really needed (love, for the most part) in childhood – and getting it now, as an adult, does nothing to erase the trauma of that early deprivation. Developmental needs can only be met at the time they naturally occur.
The fundamental error of the
Left/Right scheme thus ensures that the goals of the participants will expand
(because what's been done already is never enough, for one thing) and that the
aggression used in service of those expanding goals will continually break
restraints that had earlier seemed inviolable.
We see those results all around
us, with the Non-Aggression Principle replaced by an ever-larger and ever-more
aggressive State and with natural compassion and charity replaced with
coercively-funded State programs and coercively-enforced prohibitions and
commandments.
This expanding empire of
aggression claims to be for the people's benefit but instead serves the State
and its client corporations and interest groups; civil society shrinks and
withers in the process.
Meanwhile, the elite continue to push the toxic Left/Right paradigm, which herds the public into artificial groups at war with each other, each side over-emphasizing one part of the Duality and enraged at those who over-emphasize the other.
The power elite and their
corporate media ignore, slander, and otherwise marginalize any person, group,
or influence that threatens this destructive mind-game.
The media's frequent and often
breath-taking mistreatment of Ron Paul, the only congressman to have consistently and for decades opposed
unconstitutional use of power (including our many wars and occupations) and tax
money and who has single-handedly made the Federal Reserve an issue in American
politics, is only the most obvious and blatant example.
Paul has actually been left out
of poll results after winning the poll in question; his name has been left off
lists of campaign fund-raising results even when he was at or near the top of
the field. If you want to know how terrified the power elite are of the truth
and how far they are willing to go to hide or obscure that truth, watch the
media's handling of Dr. Paul. (For a brief, sensible look at Dr. Paul versus
his GOP competitors for the nomination, see Sizing up the
GOP field: Ron Paul is the likely nominee*; for Paul's first campaign television ad of the
race ~ and a rousingly good one ~ see here.
Abolitionists and voluntaryists
will wince at both links because Dr. Paul is a constitutionalist, but I ~ an
abolitionist and voluntaryist ~ believe that change has to begin somewhere, and
Paul is a HUGE change in the right direction over what we have now. Anyone who
expects a voluntaryist society to instantly emerge without any process leading to that point is not thinking
clearly).
* No, I don't think Paul will actually BE the nominee; if he is, I don't think he'll win the election; if he does win, I don't think he'll be allowed to dismantle any of the tyranny we now suffer under. Call me a pessimist – I am, actually – but I think we're long past the point where the power elite would allow any such thing. Without going into detail, I'll just say that if Paul overcomes the media's attempts to marginalize his campaign, I fear for his safety.
A third element was needed for the destruction of civil society in
the United States, and for creation of the aggressive tyranny designed to
replace it: funding for the
entire, costly enterprise; a mechanism to channel money and power from the
American people to the coercive
elite.
The Constitution required our
money to be only gold and silver ~ preventing the funding of tyranny by fiat
currencies ~ and prohibited any tax on income.
In 1913, however, those critical restrictions were overcome. The aggression used for funding the State was amplified exponentially with a pair of stunningly un-American tools: a national income tax and creation of a fiat-currency-creating central bank, backed up with legal tender laws requiring use of the phony money.
Together, after less than ten
decades, those tools have sucked up nearly all the wealth created by the
American people in the past century (mainstream America is broke), plus the
wealth created and bequeathed to us by earlier generations, plus the wealth of future generations, which has been
encumbered by a debt (most of it hidden with dishonest accounting) beyond
payment and almost beyond belief.
This stolen wealth has replaced civil society in America with an aggressive empire abroad and a shockingly blunt police state here at home, enriching the power elite every step of the way.
Next in this series: A World-Killing Paradigm Shift
No comments:
Post a Comment
If your comment is not posted, it was deemed offensive.