POLITICS: Mutually Assured Destruction
Trump’s actions are supposedly so uniquely hideous and horrendous that they justify or demand an unprecedented second Impeachment of a now former President. However, when one points to substantially similar behaviors on the parts of opposition politicians, the argument becomes, “Two wrongs don’t make a right.”
Well, which is it? Were his actions uniquely damnable, or do they represent what has become the status quo of politics? What EXACTLY did Trump do?
And … if what HE did was so horrendous … why the selective outrage and self-righteous indignation from those, who previously instigated, supported, endorsed, excused, and condoned, as well as directly benefited, from repeated acts of violence (i.e. riots), which included numerous deaths and billions of dollars in destruction arising from vandalism, looting, and arson?
The blatant and unabashed hypocrisy from self-serving political minions is deafening. There are entire socio-political movements calling for, nay demanding, REVOLUTION. This may be excused in some circles as hyperbole or only figurative rhetoric, but the resulting deaths and wanton destruction say otherwise.
In fits of hubris, activists demand the building a version of Utopia, which of course is of their design and through which they seek personal benefit. However, there already exists a formidable framework and expansive infrastructure, which has proven beneficial and effective albeit imperfect. Rather than to seek incremental improvement, the would-be revolutionaries are content to destroy all that is so as to make way for what they promise will be heaven on earth. However, their promised Utopia would have to be built upon the smoldering ashes of the past. It is a past — a history — which they contend has no redeeming qualities and which they allege is not worthy of a continued existence.
However, there will be no phoenix rising from the ashes. After the “war,” which they seek and which they have already declared, the would-be revolutionaries will become enamored with their newfound power. It is the power, which they covet so eagerly. It is the most treasured among all of the spoils of war. All other cherished “ideals” and empty promises, as well as the people themselves, are just means to a self-serving end.
They will quickly be corrupted by that power, as they have already demonstrated themselves to be, and the certain results will be abuse, oppression, and tyranny. In short order, they will come to resemble the petty tyrants, who they are so eager to depose and replace. Rather than the much ballyhooed and hope-for Utopia, the crumbling rubble will serve as a monument to all that was lost, and the smoldering ashes will offer a testament to what once was.
It might be that Trump is fairly described as a despicable person — a cad, huckster, and charlatan — perhaps even a morally fluid narcissistic egomaniac. He is certainly a flawed human being, as each of us is. He saddled the Leviathan. However, he did not give birth to it, and he did not release it from its fetters. He is envied by many because he accomplished a task and held a position, which they themselves covet. Joe Biden has spent his entire adult life in the sole pursuit of the brass ring, which is the Oval Office.
It is not a matter of having the wrong person(s) in the wrong office(s). The issue is commanding of government things, for which it is ill-suited. A bureaucratic state, which was never contemplated or allowed by the Constitution, has come to define the federal government. It is believed by many that agencies and institutions, which were not provided for within the Constitution are not subject to the limitations and restrictions of that Constitution and the related Bill of Rights. In the pursuit of even greater power, politicians (and those who they serve) seek to circumvent the Constitution. However, the proper mindset is to understand that the federal government has no legitimate authority, which is not voluntarily ceded to it by the people and which is specifically contained within the text of the Constitution.
The problem is the evolution of the Imperial Presidency and a Congress, in which “representatives” are more concerned about job security than they are about actually governing effectively. The Executive Branch has expanded to become a grotesque perversion of what was envisioned by the framers of the Constitution, and the unrestrained expansion of power, has led to an impotent legislature, which long ago abdicated its Constitutional powers and obligations.
The Constitution was never intended to provide a blueprint for an industrially-efficient state. It was intended to outline a government of limited and enumerated powers, which necessarily deferred to individual liberty and personal freedom. An omnipotent and unrestrained state is the antithesis of liberty and freedom. Governing is hard, and it should be. The architects of the Constitution knew that the only effective means of controlling the Leviathan and limiting its destructive tendencies was to assure that it was tightly fettered. The framers of the Constitution understood the immutable relationship between power and corruption. As power trends toward absolute, so does the certainty of corruption. Government can never be expected to be always benevolent or trusted to be forever benign.
Political minions and an increasingly dependent populous see the vast potential power of the state, and they crave that power, even if they can only possess it vicariously. They wish to unleash the beast. They envision themselves holding the reins of power. In naivete or ignorance, they believe themselves capable of harnessing and controlling the Leviathan.
They seek to use its immense power, perhaps for “good,” as they might define it, but nonetheless, they seek to use the beast to do their (often self-serving) bidding. The problem is that the beast, which is government, cannot be tamed. It is at best a necessary evil. In order to avoid widespread devastation and wanton destruction, it must be tightly fettered. Once fully unleashed, it may be impossible to restrain the beast ever again.
So, how is anything that Trump did so fundamentally different than what is affirmatively endorsed by unapologetic statists, who dominate the legacy political parties and Washington, D.C. today?
If the only distinction is in which constituencies and special interests are favored by a particular individual or by whichever political party may be in power at any given moment, then that represents a distinction without a difference.
That is like actively choosing sides in a war and eagerly pursuing the spoils of war all while decrying the nature of war itself. The only way to successfully avoid war is to refuse to participate in the conflict or to limit the abilities of the parties to wage war against each other. Otherwise, the outcome is “mutually assured destruction.”
