In Search of Angels behind the Gates of Hell
The propagandist and former moderator of NBC’s Meet the Press, Chuck Todd, wrote an online piece recently, which carried the headline: Congress is passing the FUBAR test with flying colors. Todd, who was never one to embrace objectivity and who demonstrates his biases unabashedly, identifies two sources or causes for “even more dysfunctional” government:
There’s former President Donald Trump’s rhetorical control of the right-wing information ecosystem, which seems to force otherwise well-meaning GOP elected officials to go against their own beliefs … and fall in line for fear of losing their jobs or being canceled by the right’s noise machine.
And there’s President Joe Biden’s rhetorical inability [to] put his opponents on the defensive and connect the dots for the public — and in public — about congressional GOP intransigence.
Todd’s description of the “right’s noise machine” and its embrace of an allegedly “false narrative” clearly implies, in the binary thinking of the time, that the alternative narrative of the more “progressive” left is the one to be preferred. Todd allows no real possibility that any rational party in the exercise of free will could possibly adopt, support, or embrace positions in opposition of his favored left.
Todd calls for “compromise,” but what is the basis for compromise when a party demands something to which it is not entitled? If an individual demands $1 Million from an unrelated person, who owes no debt or obligation, there is no legitimate “compromise” when the would-be beneficiary lessens his baseless demand to a seemingly more “reasonable” $500,000. Forcibly taking the private property of another is recognized as theft. The criminal act is not made more moral by interposing government between the expectant beneficiary and the target of the taking and denominating the ill-gotten booty a “tax.” Similarly, why should the GOP “compromise” on the number of illegal aliens entering the country, when the real question should be: Why are illegal aliens being allowed entry into the country (and thus benefits, jobs, and residency) at all?
Todd’s positions are echoed by others of his ilk, and those positions are predicated on the belief that government is supposed to “work” — that government is supposed to “fix” things. Government is not likely to “fix” problems of its own creation (e.g. rampant illegal immigration). Government is not going to “work” in completing the Herculean tasks commanded of it (i.e. Nanny State programs). Todd decries the failure of “establishment” Republicans to come into the light. A similar admonition is not required of the leftward-lurching Democratic party, which seldom sees a government benefit or program that it does not like. Todd is proselytizing on behalf of Statism, saying in essence:
If only the people would submit themselves to the will of government, they would be much better off (even if they are too stupid to realize it).
Government is at best a necessary evil. Government is not a mechanism, which engenders cooperation, collaboration, compromise, or consensus. At its most basic, government is an instrument of brute force whereby an electoral majority (or controlling voting bloc) seeks to impose its self-serving will upon a reluctant minority (or other disfavored group or individual). There is rarely, if ever, anything more moral or noble in the machinations of the state.
Government is not populated by saints and angels. From Federalist №51:
If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.
Political minions and technocrats come from the population of exceedingly and irretrievably flawed human beings. Our species, like nearly all organisms, is motivated by self-preservation, self-advancement, and self-propagation. We are not naturally inclined toward selflessness or altruism. Any system, which expects or commands persons to act contrary to their perceived self-interests, is doomed to failure. Those within government crave vicarious power, and they covet the position, prestige, and profit to be derived therefrom. As their power trends toward absolute, so does the certainty for corruption, and with corruption come abuse, oppression, and tyranny.
In a rare convergence of enlightenment and humility, the Founding Fathers did not seek to implement a federal government of industrial efficiency. They consciously and deliberately fettered the fledgling state, to which they gave birth. The Constitution, which serves as the sole source for federal authority, outlined a government of limited and specifically enumerated powers, which necessarily deferred to individual liberty and personal freedom via the Bill of Rights.
In the decades and centuries since, the political classes, feeling confined by the Constitution, have continually sought to expand the powers of the federal government well beyond what was ever intended or prescribed. They have endeavored to release the Leviathan from its bindings. The minders mistakenly believe themselves capable of controlling the beast and harnessing its vast powers to do their bidding. For every expansion of power, there are erosions of liberties and usurpations of freedoms. Formerly inalienable rights, serve as fodder to sustain the beast. It is likely to consume all within its reach. It will feed and devour until there is nothing left to consume. In unleashing government, they have demonstrated its destructive powers conclusively; however, having been released, it may not be possible once again to restrain the ravenous creature.
Few in government acknowledge this immutable reality. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) is among the exceptions, and he has said:
The Founders never intended for Americans to trust their government. Our entire Constitution was predicated on the notion that government was a necessary evil, to be restrained and minimized as much as possible.
The problem is not in having the wrong person or party in a particular position or office. The problem is in commanding of government things, for which the institution is ill-suited and which are entirely contrary to the inherent nature of the beast. However, it is rarely a winning campaign strategy to say: We must expect less from government and do more for ourselves. Too many persons want government to “do” for them, but not so much for everyone else. The political classes attempt to sell government as a win-win solution, but all too often those, who reap the benefits, are unrelated to or disassociated from “others,” who are commanded to pay the price or to suffer the sacrifices. The expectation that everyone might be able to get everything that they want has led to budgetary recklessness and fiscal irresponsibility, including annual trillion-dollar deficits and an accumulated National Debt approaching $34 Trillion.
The “successes” of government, upon which misplaced confidence is founded, came primarily in times of war. The United States was instrumental in allied victories in both World Wars. Being the only world Super Power relatively unscathed after WWII, the United States enjoyed a “Golden Age” in the latter half of the 20th Century. These were unique circumstances, which are not likely to be replicated, giving rise to an extraordinary era, which is not likely to be repeated. The techniques giving rise to success during wartime cannot be applied domestically in times of relative peace. In war, there is usually a truly existential threat, which is an enemy common to all. Where the enemy is defined as some segment of the People, the resulting promulgations, policies, and programs put those People in a perpetual state of war with themselves. There can be no victory in such self-destructive battles.
Nevertheless, politicians seek to apply a “war footing” to domestic policies and programs. [See FDR and Biden.] The objectives are obvious given that all is fair in … war. The fog of war allows cover for all manner of waste, inefficiency, and destruction. This is why we have incessant “wars” against nebulous and indomitable foes such as: Poverty, Crime, Drugs, Disease, Climate Change, Terrorism, Hate, etc. The People are tired of constant states of war among themselves; however, political minions and technocrats thrive on the chaos, and they seek to profit from the resulting destruction. Their mindset and actions are barely distinguishable from warmongers and profiteers. Why should parties be expected to “fix” societal ills, when they might be paid handsomely to “treat” the problems for a lifetime … or several lifetimes?
For this reason government is management by crisis. Politicians foment unrest and seek out crises. If there are not sufficient crises, as measured in number or scope, to justify their continued existence or expansion of fiefdoms, they are content to callously allow naturally occurring events to fester into full-blown crises. Should that too prove insufficient, they are entirely capable of manufacturing crises out of whole cloth.
Rational and reasonable parties do not expect government to “work” or to “fix” things. Government repeatedly and consistently has demonstrated itself unworthy of confidence and trust. I for one feel more safe and secure within an incompetent state run by a buffoon than to be the subject of an industrially efficient state, which knows no bounds. In recent years, it has become difficult to discern which parties are more buffoonish. So, yes government is FUBARed. It always has been, and absent angelic intervention, it always will be. Quit looking at politicians as messianic, and stop expecting government to serve as savior. Not only is disappointment certain to result, but in your choice of a perceived “lesser evil” you may be participating in the creation of hell on earth!
