I would figure Grunt to be a “leave-other-people-alone-ist” anti-authoritarian type, lol. Anyone who has that avatar (Donald Sutherland, a fine Canadian liberal actor btw.) is gotta be anti-authority! I'm kinda that way myself. Used to think that I was a libertarian (with bleeding heart tendencies) until I realized that being a libertarian is like being a communist: They both sound good on paper, but in practice...
Don’t confuse me with a libertarian as I ascribe to political belief system that I’m aware of. I agree with you that libertarianism and communism and would add socialism, anarchism and any other political philosophies sound good on paper, but in practice . . . .
Because as Fred pointed out they become government driven ideologies at which point they stop being a means to and end and become an end unto themselves, and w/o a reality check (competition for power or threat thereof) become willing to do whatever it takes to see the fruition of their version of utopian ideals.
The framers of the constitution understood this writing it to dived government powers between what they believed were the three most successful forms of ancient government Monarchy (President), Oligarchy (Senate) and Democracy (House) each having it’s own strengths and weaknesses balance out by completion. The powers were divided in such a way as to try to prevent any one branch from being dominant and for each branch to derive from different sources thus having divided loyalties preventing to much collusion. Unfortunately things immediately began happening to undermine the foundation (initially these things were not unanticipated by the founders).
First was the formation of national political parties pulling elected officials loyalty away from there constituents self interest and toward the parties collective interest. Which due to the presidential (winner takes all) system (as opposed to a proportional parliamentary system) lead to only two political parties being viable. Now add in mass communication and the free flow of campaign money with it’s corresponding impact on elections and you now have people living in New York heavily influencing elections in Colorado. This removes the intent of the House being elected to look out for the self interest of the individual members districts in at least partly in favor of the party line.
Formation of a national currency and ensuing need for a National Bank to regulate it ensured all economic activity would ultimately be influenced by the central government. Not claiming this is bad or good just that it is.
The 16th Amendment allowing for a federal income tax furthered the pulling of power away from localities to a central authority. Now the central government can take money away from people/states and threaten not to give it back unless certain standards are met.
The 17th Amendment proscribing the direct election of senators destroyed the constitutional division of powers by making all branches of government popularly elected. The founders understood that more “democracy” (mob rule) is not always a good thing.
The rise of the judiciary to become in many ways the dominant governing (a modern version of high priests if you will) branch by legislating through judicial fiat.
All these things point in one direction, the consolidation of power, something political theorists from every culture, time and place throughout human history have warned against. I have no delusions that minus government we would have far worse, corporate oligarchy, anarchy (which often becomes dictatorship by people seeking protection from the anarchy).
Baring major social upheaval (or at least the threat of it) power will centralize. It seems an inevitable aspect of human nature at least for groups to large for face-to-face relations between all members and often for those groups too. My political philosophy is simply that power seeking (be it individual, group (militias, corporate, political parties. . .) or governments) should be resisted at all times since in the long run it can’t be stopped w/o social unrest (causing it’s own problems), thus postponing the inevitable social upheaval necessary to break up to strong a power and start the whole process over again.
One saving grace in the long run is that the very powerful be they individuals or even nations become complacent. They loose their hunger and drive that brought them to dominance decaying from within and collapsing under their own weight.
An educated and working populace is a safe and happy one. I pay a lot in home owners taxes as well. And you know where most of that goes? To help fund the schools in my county. And I don't have any freaking kids! But hey, I'll help fund your lil' snowflakes edumacation so Johnny can learn to read and get a good job so he isn't out robbing me at 2:00 am at an ATM.
Money does not equal education. The children I met in West Africa were better educated than most U.S. children I meet at pennies on the dollar for what we spend because their parents valued education. Significant others in a child’s life who care about education equals educated children. You want to make a difference in their lives keep your money and go down to the neighborhood and knock some sense into the parents who are allowing their kids to be on the street at 2:00 am. If more people volunteered with themselves rather than other peoples pocket books we could shape this country up most ricky tick.
Believe me I’ve extensively studied poverty (both urban and rural in many countries) even editing the education section of a report to congress on rural poverty for one of my professors. Money really doesn’t equal education, nor does education equal life success (when controlling for other factors). The single most determining factor in the success (social economic status) of a child are the expectations of significant others (parents, teachers, priests, community leaders. . .). Money is easy (behavioral change isn’t) and makes it look like something is being done.
BTW living in WI I was a volunteer firefighter. Here in Phoenix I help local JROTC programs (mostly underprivileged kids). I help train local high school kids to be A&P mechanics through a program my unit sponsors with a local high school. Two of the kids I’ve personally trained are now full time employees in my unit and many others are aircraft mechanics in the Air Force, Navy and a few at airlines. Best thing is none of what I’m doing is lining the pockets of some federal or local bureaucrat.
I actually hope that the Republican party can get it's shit together and get back to it's stated principals (for which I share many) of smaller (but smarter, more efficient and less intrusive) government and non-interventionist foreign policy. We need their yang to the Democrats ying.
I completely agree but it won’t happen. Funny how the Democrats use to be the interventionist. Now with the
neo-conservative influence on the Republican party they are the ones who want to march off to war. This was an inevitable outgrowth of the ending of the cold war which validated the neo-conservative ideal that government can solve problems through military force. Couple that with the relative ease with which the First Gulf War was prosecuted and more foreign interventions became inevitable.
Eventually the religious right will push for more and more intervention in domestic policy making so I don’t see any chance that the republican party will ever be able to get back to being the party of small government not that they ever have been in my lifetime due to their support of the military industrial complex.
Ok way too long but you wrote some interesting stuff which I wanted to share my opinion about. There’s much more but we could talk about but. . . .
Cheers,
Dean
