[Another oldie from Palace of Reason days. This one comes to mind because of this story from Washington D.C. I’m sure you’ll see the relevance. -- FWP]
"States, like men, have their growth, their manhood, their decrepitude, and their decay." -- Walter S. Landor.
Why do nations, which, being composed entirely of ideas, are potentially immortal, age, stumble, and collapse? There are many causal threads to follow. Today I will explore "them".
Who's responsible for the poor condition of the roads, the axle-breaking potholes, the piles of detritus that offend the eye and nose? Not you nor I, but "them." But getting "them" to deal with any of it is like pulling teeth, whereas none of us have the time or wherewithal; we're all too busy earning enough to pay our taxes. That's just the way things are.
Who's responsible for that elderly widow down the block, the one who can't really get around any more and should get a visit about three times a day to make sure she's all right? Not you nor I, but "them." And "they" haven't been doing such a good job of it, or she wouldn't have broken both hips in six months' time. But "they" took the job, and it's not ours to question their performance now that we've surrendered it to "them." That's just the way things are.
Who's responsible for dealing with the gang that claims to "own" this block, that's committed one mugging after another for years but never seems to be taken in hand? Not you nor I, but "them." "They" claim to own all the police powers, though they exercise them quite selectively, and only when it suits their mood. "They" forbade us our own means of defense, too; for us to own and carry guns is far too dangerous to the public peace. What public peace, you say? Well, yes. But we can't seem to get our guns or our authority as citizens back, so we have to hide behind the double-locked doors of our homes and leave the streets to animals that walk upright. That's just the way things are.
Why is it the way things are? Because at various times and on various grounds, "they" persuaded us to transfer our responsibilities to them. It's not clear why we did it. After all, "they" hadn't been doing that well with the jobs we'd previously assigned "them." But we did it, perhaps out of wishful thinking, perhaps out of laziness. And there seems to have been a ratchet involved, for, much as we'd like to, we can't seem to transfer the responsibilities back into our own hands.
Can the ratchet be undone? I don't know. I think it would require far too many men willing to court danger and possible death to wrest back the police powers, however unwisely they were delegated. We'll get our guns back only by armed insurrection. As for the sweeping transfer of civil responsibility and public property back into the hands of common citizens, that's almost as unlikely. They require tax revolts and organized resistance to the seizure of property through condemnation, which, though guaranteed successful if enough people participate, are as rare as snowballs in July. The wrath of the State is terrible toward those who deny its power to tax and confiscate, and everyone fears to step forward in defiance only to find himself alone.
We should have known better. We probably did.
3 comments:
For those who haven't surrendered their guns (or allowed their local 'them' to impose such conditions on ownership to make it extremely painful to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights), their neighborhoods don't seem to have such 'gang' problems. Many do still tend to their neighbors' needs (sometimes through their house of worship and sometimes on their own). And this is done because it is the right thing to do regardless of whether 'they' have said that 'they' would do it.
But there's still the almighty "them" that demands their tribute, payable in full by April 15 or thereabouts each year.
As long as we can believe that our votes count, then we have the power to fire some of "them". We cannot fire all the petty bureaucrats, but if we can fire enough of 'them' that are responsible for making the petty bureaucrats do what they're supposed to do (and also not do what they're not supposed to do), we still have hope for restraining the reach of 'them'. And maybe even ratcheting back a bit (optimistic of course).
According to my version of Wikipedia, Australia's Eastern half was claimed by Great Britain in 1770 and was "initially settled through penal transportation" beginning in 1788. And that same Wikipedia article points out that Australia has the world's 12th largest economy and the world's fifth-highest per capita income.
Obvious solution? Any black committing a violent felony is held in a federal penitentiary until such time as a full shipload of such felons are available for transit to Africa. At that time, the shipload of felons is transported to Namibia and offloaded and shorn of U.S. citizenship. Should any other African nation desire the shipment, that nation will be paid $10,000 per felon.
Any Hispanic committing a violent felony will likewise be transported to the Mexican border. The Mexican government can agree to accept each felon, with a payment of $10,000, or not. Concurrently, a border fence WILL be created and manned by rotating unitss of the National Guard or in-service U.S. Army troops with orders to detain or kill any illegal trespassers.
Any Asian violent felon - China. $10,000 if the Chines want to accept them or they get dumped on any island the Chinese now "claim."
Any Middle-Easterner, Saudi Arabia.
Any "European," Greenland (or Falklands? Kamchatka?), or whatever Merkel-led, self-destructive social democracy wants the $10,000 per violent felon.
Any "white" (or anyone the bureaucracy just isn't sure of) California, or whichever state has the greatest number of "sanctuary cities." (Just kidding.) Violent whites go to any country bidding to accept %10,000 per felon. If none, they can pay $10,000 cash bail, or ROT IN HELL until such time as they earn $10,000 through Congressional approved work programs.
Racist? Yep. Drastic? Sure. Effective? Oh, hell, yeah.
Tim Turner
Francis, I realize that, as usual, my comment missed the point of your post, "Them." You weren't addressing specific measures with which to repair infrastructure or fight crime. You were highlighting how "we the people" have come to be sneer quote - represented - sneer quote by a mostly faceless and irresponsible bureaucracy.
My apologies. Because of some back problems, I've been having trouble sleeping. That's no excuse. I have to get back to NOT getting online after I've been drinking boxed wine and playing computer baseball.
Tim Turner
Post a Comment