Sunday, August 30, 2009

If Government Were Less Intrusive, Politics Would Be Less Divisive

One of the reasons that politics has become a blood sport in the last several decades, is because of the extent to which government has inserted itself into our daily lives. Government redistributes our wealth and it regulates practically everything we do.

It pits the haves against the have nots as it takes wealth from those who earned it, and gives it to those who have not. That isn't charity; it's slavery. It pits special interests against We the People, as special interests use the force of government to ram their agenda down our throats.

The original idea was that we all mind our own business, voting for our own best interest with our dollars every day of the week in a self-regulating free market. The first amendment guaranteed freedom of speech and of the press, so we could freely argue all sides of an issue with no fear of government reprisal.
The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits. -- Thomas Jefferson
Government provided a minimal set of laws and services to provide for a civil society in which We the People were at liberty to lead our individual lives. It wasn't until the idiotic idea of "social justice" replaced "liberty and justice for all" that we began our downard spiral into oligarchy and strife.

If government were less intrusive, politics would be less divisive. We need an impartial government that once again guarantees liberty and justice for all.


  1. A self-regulating free market isn't perfect, but it is much closer to perfection than central government control.

    For the cases where the free market fails us, we have the courts, and in certain situations (natural monopolies) government regulation.

    A fundamental principle of engineering is inverse feedback. Inverse feedback regulates a dynamic system by detecting errors, inverting them, and feeding them back into the system. This is an error cancellation mechanism. A crucial element of inverse feedback is to keep the feedback loop as short and as accurate as possible, to eliminate delay, and thus, instability.

    Individual liberty is equivalent to local feedback. Local government control is a longer and slower feedback loop. State government control is still longer and slower. Federal control is the longest, slowest and least accurate feedback loop of all.

    From an engineering standpoint, individual liberty is most preferred, and central government is least preferred, and only desirable if absolutely no other feedback mechanism is available. Obviously, we have very few engineers in government.

  2. Nice article.

    Don't forget what Andrew Jackson and Eisenhower said though:

    This problem started far before social justice with central banking and the military industrial complex. They made the advent of "social justice" a possibility.

  3. Mark,

    I agree that central banking (i.e., the Federal Reserve Bank system) is a distortion of our liberty created by congress. However, I don't see how that enabled "social justice". I see it as two separate issues, although they are both in need of repair.

    The military industrial complex is a little more obscure to me. The military industrial complex grew up out of fighting WWI and WWII. Fighting (and winning) modern wars requires lots of high tech industrial support, even in peacetime. I cannot say I like it, but I think it is a fact of life.

    Maintaining a military to protect our borders is one of the few powers enumerated in the Constitution that the federal government actually has, and it is one of the only powers that the lefts wants it to abandon.


This is a moderated forum. Please try to avoid ad-hominem attacks and gratuitous profanity. Justifiable profanity may be tolerated.

I am sorry, but due to the un-manageable volume of spam comments, I have enabled the scrambled word verification. I apologize for the inconvenience.