A MAD Political Agenda: Mutually Assured Destruction
On NBC’s “Meet the Press” there was a recurring theme: Many increasingly dissatisfied members of the Democratic base want the more “moderate” President to “fight harder” in order to advance a leftward lurching agenda. The Neo-Socialists cannot accept that their self-serving agenda is not desirable or even acceptable to a large segment of the population. The refrain continues to echo: “If only those ‘deplorables’ were smart enough to know what is good for them.” The implication being that it is best to capitulate to the incessant wants and increasingly unreasonable demands … or else.
They wish for their policies and programs to be imposed by force (of law) upon reluctant and disfavored “minorities” (representing constituencies of nearly equivalent size and/or power). They engage in fruitless battles against nebulous and indomitable foes such as poverty, crime, disease, drugs, terror, hate, etc. A perpetual state of war is used to justify all manner of waste, inefficiencies, and atrocities: “All is fair … in war.” War serves as its own justification. There can be no discernible victory or viable exit strategy. There are only discontentment, strife, and conflict, which fuel the need and provide justification for more government … more dependency … less liberty … and fewer freedoms. These factors produce a downward spiral, from which recovery is unlikely.
Political minions have abandoned any pretext of fostering cooperative action. After all, successful cooperative action requires mutualities of commitment, contribution, and benefit. Should those mutualities exist, disparate parties are motivated to come together voluntarily, and the intrusions and impositions of government are likely superfluous or even counterproductive. In the absence of such mutualities, however, no amount of government interference is likely to make the endeavor successful.
Nevertheless, the proponents of government action seek to utilize the coercive and compulsory powers of the state so as to force nonconforming parties to engage in disadvantageous relationships and disproportionate transactions, in which those reluctant parties would not voluntarily participate. In the absence of voluntary participation and resulting from brute force, the actions of government amount to institutional theft and involuntary servitude. These are illegitimate state actions.
Proponents see the “fight” as worth it despite questionable motivations and the near certainty of harms. Initially, they naively believe that the resulting costs and losses will be borne exclusively by “others.” However, the cumulative harms cannot be contained, and they are ultimately felt and suffered by all. Those seeking to benefit from battle initiate the fight in ignorance, but they perpetuate it through demonstrations of arrogance and in fits of hubris.
The would-be revolutionaries crave vicarious power, and they covet the position, prestige, and profit to be derived therefrom. However, they must be content to scavenge for tarnished trinkets among the rubble and ashes, which epitomize the aftermath of revolution. A pervasive ignorance of history allows them to embrace the promise and expectation to “Build Back Better;” however, there will be no Utopia. There will be no phoenix rising from the ashes. Instead, the crumbling rubble will serve as a monument to what once was, and the smoldering ashes will provide a lasting testament to all that was lost.
