Great civilsations do not explode they implode--quite often not with a bang like the USSR did--but with a whimper--the America could be headed that way.
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Robert <[email protected]> wrote: > Big Versus Small, Government--- the Impending Collision > > Two major philosophies of government seem to be on a collision course. > > In the “Big Government” approach, the view is that ordinary people > cannot be left to their own devices. The ordinary man, unruled by a > wise and benevolent government, is either incompetent or greedy. The > greedy will take advantage of the incompetent, and social injustice > will inflict its cruelties upon the weak and helpless. > > In the “Small Government” approach, big government is not viewed as > wise and benevolent, but rather, insulated from the consequences of > its failed policies. It is government, not the populace, which must > be held accountable, and restrained from becoming cruelly tyrannical. > > Among the great confusions of the argument, is that “Small Government” > is taken by its opponents to mean, “No Government.” > > The US Constitution clearly rejects that myth. Instead, the powers > and responsibilities of government are specifically enumerated. > Within its boundaries, the federal government is very powerful. It > can levy taxes, declare war, imprison miscreants, and put to death > traitors. Although the fifty states are each sovereign, self- > governing entities, the federal government can regulate their inter- > state relations, and in some cases, overrule their laws. This is > hardly a “no government" approach. The limited powers of the federal > government are significant to say the least. > > Key to understanding the US Constitution are its first ten amendments, > known collectively as the “Bill of Rights.” Freedom of speech, of > religion, from unreasonable search, and so forth, give the citizenry > enormous powers of autonomy, and freedom FROM government, except where > specified in the Constitution. And just in case anyone misses the > point, the final and Tenth Amendment (of the first ten) stipulates > quite carefully, and I quote its entirety: > > “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, > nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States > respectively, or to the people.” > > Clearly, the boundaries of the federal government confine it to the > Constitution only, and not to any whim, not to any sense of a “good > cause,” not to any opinion of fairness, nor to any conception of > “social justice.” Those kinds of value judgments are left entirely to > the states and the people, and prohibited to the federal government. > > And just as clearly, there has been a steady drift away from those > limits, and toward an ever more powerful, ever less accountable, > federal government, until finally, we have a president and congress > that are unabashedly socialist. Although they prefer the term, > “Progressive,” their policy ambitions are barely distinguishable from > West European socialism. Indeed, they often seem more draconian. > > Now that the gloves are off, now that the US federal government has > extended its reach far beyond its Constitutional confines, there > finally is a popular backlash. It may be too late, but those who say > it is too little are underestimating its strength. > > In the past, social policy protests have largely been conducted by > college students, and by people who have the leisure time to spend on > picket lines. > > No more. > > The recent protests in the US are dominated by older, working-class > Americans, including moderates, independents, and yes, even some > liberals, who have finally been awakened to their impending fate. The > trigger seems to have been the health care law, but that was only the > trigger. > > Regarding healthcare, nowhere in the US Constitution is the federal > government authorized to dictate to Americans which health care > measures they are obliged to purchase. The amendment process is the > only legal way for the federal government to obtain that power, and > the voting public would never tolerate such an overreach. The Tenth > Amendment specifically denies such powers to the federal government, > and there is little sympathy to make an exception. > > Many Americans have become aware, that if the federal government can > blatantly disregard this limit on its power, then it can with impunity > ignore any limits on its power. > > Suddenly, the vastly popular president has slipped in his approval > ratings to historic lows. The upcoming November elections threaten to > remove his Congress from power and replace it with not only one of the > opposition party, but even, a body of those who represent an energized > and outraged public. > > Warning. Nothing in the behavior of the present government suggests > that it will relinquish power easily. Nothing in its record indicates > that it will bow to the will of the people if there is any > possibility, by any means, of enforcing its will. > > War against Iran seems to me to be the perfect pretext for canceling > the elections. A devastating attack on Iran, the preparations for > which have been far more reported in the British press than in the > American news, would surely unleash havoc. Many tens of thousands of > Islamist fanatics already inside the US could be called upon to wage > Jihad in our shopping malls, schools, and government offices. Such > and various forms of chaos have already been anticipated by the > “Continuity of Government” plans, in which UNELECTED officials would > take control of the infrastructure. > > While this is an extreme “worst-case” scenario, it is not entirely out > of the question. Britain would not be spared, and undoubtedly, all of > western Europe might find itself engulfed in Parisian style riots by > Islamists. > > My hope and dream is that the November elections will be held, will be > honest, and will be obeyed by the US federal government. We shall > see. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Epistemology" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<epistemology%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en. > > -- nubiaafrika.blogspot.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
