I would rather eat my keyboard than watch the State of the Union speech, so
consider this article an act of sacrificial public service.
The most irritating thing about the State of the Union is that we are a
captive audience � in every way. This guy taxes us, spends our money on
stuff he likes, sends our kids to war on his decision, lies to us, dares to
believe that his personal will is somehow more important than yours or mine
or anyone else's solely because he managed to eke out a few more electoral
votes than Gore two years ago, and to top it off, expects that we will
watch for more than an hour as he prattles, while his minions interrupt him
only to stand and applaud.
Where to begin to criticize? George Bush is the biggest spender since
Lyndon Johnson, increasing federal spending at a rate twice that of
Clinton, and yet he stands up and demands spending restraint, seeming to
blame everyone but himself.
He talks about freedom and opportunity and then brags about his new
bureaucracies, spending programs, mandates, comprehensive plans,
regulations, and goals concerning all our lives, from how our kids are
educated to the cars we drive to the way we care for those in need.
He claims to care for life, decries partial-birth abortion, but refuses to
rule out the use of nuclear weapons in the war he is plotting. He calls on
America to feed the entire world, liberate all its women, educate all its
children, and cure all its sick, even as ghettos rife with every social
pathology languish miles from the White House.
Hypocrisy? He denounces bureaucrats and praises innovation only to demand a
huge new boondoggle program to put researchers on the dole. Indeed, the
underlying assumption behind the entire speech was that America�s
commitment is identical to his own commitment, which is reflected in his
plans for your money.
Don�t write me to say that he wants to cut taxes, and so we should like
him. Every few minutes, we heard spending numbers: tens and hundreds of
millions, tens and hundreds of billions! It is never too much, and nothing
is outside his purview. Indeed, he calls for the federal government, under
his leadership, to "transform" our "souls." He went further: he says he is
defending the "hopes of all mankind."
His entire foreign policy seems like a massive effort to incite every
terrorist in the world against this country, and otherwise encourage every
small country to arm to the teeth against the US threat. From the
government�s point of view, such would only increase the power of D.C., so
one has to wonder whether this is the point after all. And not to nitpick,
but how can he at once say that Iraq is despotic for ignoring the UN even
as he brags that he will ignore the UN if he chooses?
"The course of this nation does not depend on the decisions of others� I
will defend the freedom and security of the American people."
Are these not the words of a dictator?
It's too much! There should be a break at the midway point, in which we
could broadcast messages like: You are our servant, not our master!
Everything you do, you do with our money! There are three branches of
government, and you only represent one! The powers not granted to you are
reserved to the states and the people! You are not king of the world! The
founders envisioned frequent impeachments!
Instead, we must sit and sit and watch a despotic display that seems like
an import from the times of Pharaohs and Caesars, or the modern world of
dictators and commissars. What does this one fellow, holed up in the White
House, living off other people's money, surrounded by sycophants and
pollsters, know about the state of the union?
The speech was particularly bad this year because we are dealing with a man
who has clearly lost perspective. He speaks about his desire for peace even
as he ignores the whole world's plea for him not to bomb and kill. He talks
about a war on terror but the words Osama Bin Laden never pass his lips. He
speaks of all the things the government will do to make us prosperous even
as a two-year track record has failed to put a dent in the worsening
recession.
Indeed, his language seems to reflect a very dangerous state of mind. He
habitually speaks about America as identical to the central state, and
seems to regard that state as incarnated in himself � the entire apparatus
of government embodied in his person. His will is the people's will, the
perfect realization of Rousseau's fantasy. But rather than the language of
the French Revolution, he uses the cadences of his evangelical
constituents, invoking God and quoting old-time hymns.
Americans have a hard time recognizing just how fascistically scary all
this is because we are surrounded by it all the time, and we read and watch
a media that rarely draws attention to it. But foreigners see it.
Hardly a day goes by when I don't receive a call from abroad, usually from
some classical liberal scholar or supporter, who asks with astonishment:
what in the world is going on over there? What is it that drives this man?
Why is your president going to war? Who does he think he is? How broadly is
he supported? Are there no mechanisms available within your system of
government to rein him in?
Well, the speech tonight illustrates the problem. Whereas Clinton was
merely a con man who seemed to revel in his ability to dupe people, Bush is
something more alarming: he may actually believe what he is saying.
Sadly, there are no mechanisms to restrain him other than public opinion.
Americans are instinctively suspicious of government, but when it is headed
by someone who seems to be a good and sincere man, they let the head of
state get away with murder, particularly the murder of foreigners.
Just in time, however, it is becoming more obvious than ever that the
economy is not improving.
For 20 months, the business punditry and the government have been telling
us that the economy is not in recession but is rather only stumbling a bit.
Recovery is perpetually underway.
The truth is that we are still in the midst of what even official data
designate as the longest recession in postwar history.
There's nothing like a prolonged recession to end a people's romance with
the head of state, and this seems to be happening. It was due to internal
polling that the speech had an unusual focus on domestic issues, at least
in minutes. But instead of recognizing an obvious truth that there is
nothing the government can do to improve our lot except get out of the way,
Bush has invoked a tired clich�: we must rally to a unified "great cause"
that involves serving the government and serving each other in ways the
government approves of.
This man has no idea what a "great cause" is. In the real world, a great
cause is doing something like meeting a payroll, getting one's kids a good
education, paying for college, doing a good job at work, helping the needy
through our churches, maintaining healthy families and peace at home. These
day-to-day details of bourgeois living constitute the great cause, and it
has nothing to do with the government. Nothing at all!
But in Bush's mind, no cause can be truly great unless it is endorsed and
generally organized by the state. If the great cause that Bush is seeking
won't actually address any real problem that the typical American may be
having, what is the point? It is to "rally the American people," as they
say, which is to say, distract them from the failures of the state in hopes
that they will view the state as the organizing center for all of society.
This is the real point of invoking a great cause.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/powerlust.html
