It seems inevitable that Republicans will clean up in the 2022 midterms, as the first chunk of the Biden presidency can be accurately described as a dumpster fire of monkey shit floating on a chunky sea of word vomit spewed from our lying media presstitutes.
Isn’t it the case that people who seek high office do so because they want power and control? Power and control and limited/small government are not natural bedfellows, so those who seek high office will not be inclined towards small, limited government.
Isn’t it also the case, that those who seek high office are unemployable in the competitive, private, wealth producing sector at any level that would give them similar status and reward, which is why they go into politics which requires no great skill-set just a high score on the psychopath/sociopath scale?
What’s the remedy? Move away from elected governments, restore sovereignty of the individual so each has equal power (which used to be democracy), power cannot be pooled, concentrated, so each is self-governing according to governance of Common Law, tradition, societal etiquette, with no government over them. An administrative non-tax raising, non-legislating body enforces law, upholds rule of law, due process and justice.
How to achieve the remedy is another matter. But.
Attributed to 19th Century jurist & author Alexander Fraser Tytler: “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury.”
I’d say we are past that, with near 50% of able people who get paid to do jobs that make no profit, and who vote themselves a share of plunder taken by the State from the rest who produce the wealth.
Local, local, local! Sheriffs, city councils, school boards. Elections where you can literally go to their house and knock on their door and ask, "WTF?" are the ones that truly matter. And, of course, finding your own posse and making the "need" to be "led" obsolete. Great post.
That's always been the dilemma for oppositional political movements (if you balk at th word movement, remeber it didn't use to mean a unified collective structure but a general trend among those parties non-affiliated with existing political hegemony):
Stay ideologically pure and virginal, or drop the knickers and get on with doing the dirty.
Seen it among alphabet-soup communists (we used to joke over here that commies breed by fission, seeing as their groups and parties were alwyas splitting in smaller and smaller sects, each one more and more puritanical in following one of their prophets or another).
Wasn't until they realised that they can't get any influence unless they make said influence the point.
Liberatarians and anarchists have always had the same problem. "Oh that guy? He denies the truth of Ludwig von Mises, so he must be a plant for Them", or "Her? No way, 35 years ago she voted for regulated parking in city, a sure sign of a Stalinist". Look at US libertarian debate and examples and tell me straight you've never seen that kind of stupid sectarianism and puritanism.
Want power to make your ideas real? Learn the game of the system. Never ever appear as to attack the system itself: it will defend itself. Learn to doublethink.
And accept that capitalism and communism are two paths leading to the same destination. Laissez faire-capitalism, an-cap ideas, and so on are flawed from the start being based on tabula rasa. Be very stern with your own philosophy and hammer it down to actual factual concrete suggestions - should you local town have parking meters or not? Loss/gain? Problems? Your principles must be weaved into concrete suggstions dealing with everyday local stuff if youare to convince enough people that you've actually have something going for you.
Appeal to emotion, symbolism, and GBa against the usual suspects are all well and good when venting, but isn't constructive and makes you look like a whiny loser in the eyes of voters, so avoiddoing it in public: be for goodm beter things and ways instea of only being against something.
All of the above may well be preaching to the pastor, but I'm no mindreader, and I have saw the swedish left wing extremists move from being an insignificant fringe to being parto f the mainstream in just two decades by simply integrating themselves into the system, and systematically promoting likeminded people in every party (they joined all the political parties), every agnecy, even in every organisation in civil society. And now they are inseparable from the governemental and societal fabric.
The Moslem Brotherhood works the same way. Peace, rights, poitivity, unity, integration, infiltration; accepting it may be decades or even a century or more until they are one and the same with the structure of power.
I believe libertarians have a problem preventig the from doing that, thus dooming them to forever being a rand phenomenon and just someones excuse and warning example:
Libertarianism is inherently and intrinsically egotist on an individual level. As long as that remains, any and all attempts will end like the one in Vermont a couple of years back. Note that the only defence of that experiment from pages like Reason and such, was rhetoric to the tune of "not real libertarians".
"And the GOP being the GOP, they couldn’t simply ‘replace’ it with a patient giving money to the doctor for services rendered like every successful industry in the country."
Including every INSURANCE industry OTHER THAN health insurance, the most heavily regulated and manipulated insurance industry by a country mile. Gee, I wonder if that could be why.
Yes, most Republicans are less bad than most Democrats. Why not step outside the politicians? Start with Dennis Kucinich for President, and Ron Paul for VP. Kucinich is a Democrat with genuinely libertarian tendencies. Ron Paul is the definition of libertarianism. Sure, Kucinich is old and may not live out his term. Unlike Joe Biden, that might be a good thing.
The insurance companies and every element of the medical industry from the corporatized hospital systems to the pharmaceutical behemoths love Obamacare. In other words, everyone who caused the problem benefitted from the so-called solution. That will be true for any problem the uni-party pretends to solve. We need to break up the parties.
Well, I thought there was a general consensus across Substacks sharing the sensibilities of this one that we've got a Uniparty that strangles in the womb any candidate attempting to break for unpolluted territory.
I was enough of a moron to have voted twice for Bernie in the primaries, and he's proven as much a shill for the fetid swamp as any of 'em. Of course, joke's on me for thinking a "socialist" was a sensible choice under any circumstances.
I've said before somewhere, and will again, that the most important elections are at the micro-local level because they are the beginning of the journey for anyone really determined to have any sort of future in politics. The trick is to find, support and protect from smears and fake scandals genuinely independent candidates, starting with school boards, and ensure they can build a meaningful political resume so they needn't prostitute themselves to either party. This is a generation's work. Take your vitamins, guys.
I used to be a Dem. That was before they turned fascists.
I've never felt more politically homeless. *le sigh* Story of my adult life.
its the same story as 'anyone but trump'
theyre all corrupted to the core and nothing but another revolution will fix it
Isn’t it the case that people who seek high office do so because they want power and control? Power and control and limited/small government are not natural bedfellows, so those who seek high office will not be inclined towards small, limited government.
Isn’t it also the case, that those who seek high office are unemployable in the competitive, private, wealth producing sector at any level that would give them similar status and reward, which is why they go into politics which requires no great skill-set just a high score on the psychopath/sociopath scale?
What’s the remedy? Move away from elected governments, restore sovereignty of the individual so each has equal power (which used to be democracy), power cannot be pooled, concentrated, so each is self-governing according to governance of Common Law, tradition, societal etiquette, with no government over them. An administrative non-tax raising, non-legislating body enforces law, upholds rule of law, due process and justice.
How to achieve the remedy is another matter. But.
Attributed to 19th Century jurist & author Alexander Fraser Tytler: “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury.”
I’d say we are past that, with near 50% of able people who get paid to do jobs that make no profit, and who vote themselves a share of plunder taken by the State from the rest who produce the wealth.
This may be a ripping point that starts to reverse the trend of routine corruption:
Doctors are now *expected* to give early treatment such as ivermectin in Kansas.
As Kansas goes, so goes the nation?
:https://colleenhuber.substack.com/p/covid-care-about-face
Local, local, local! Sheriffs, city councils, school boards. Elections where you can literally go to their house and knock on their door and ask, "WTF?" are the ones that truly matter. And, of course, finding your own posse and making the "need" to be "led" obsolete. Great post.
That's always been the dilemma for oppositional political movements (if you balk at th word movement, remeber it didn't use to mean a unified collective structure but a general trend among those parties non-affiliated with existing political hegemony):
Stay ideologically pure and virginal, or drop the knickers and get on with doing the dirty.
Seen it among alphabet-soup communists (we used to joke over here that commies breed by fission, seeing as their groups and parties were alwyas splitting in smaller and smaller sects, each one more and more puritanical in following one of their prophets or another).
Wasn't until they realised that they can't get any influence unless they make said influence the point.
Liberatarians and anarchists have always had the same problem. "Oh that guy? He denies the truth of Ludwig von Mises, so he must be a plant for Them", or "Her? No way, 35 years ago she voted for regulated parking in city, a sure sign of a Stalinist". Look at US libertarian debate and examples and tell me straight you've never seen that kind of stupid sectarianism and puritanism.
Want power to make your ideas real? Learn the game of the system. Never ever appear as to attack the system itself: it will defend itself. Learn to doublethink.
And accept that capitalism and communism are two paths leading to the same destination. Laissez faire-capitalism, an-cap ideas, and so on are flawed from the start being based on tabula rasa. Be very stern with your own philosophy and hammer it down to actual factual concrete suggestions - should you local town have parking meters or not? Loss/gain? Problems? Your principles must be weaved into concrete suggstions dealing with everyday local stuff if youare to convince enough people that you've actually have something going for you.
Appeal to emotion, symbolism, and GBa against the usual suspects are all well and good when venting, but isn't constructive and makes you look like a whiny loser in the eyes of voters, so avoiddoing it in public: be for goodm beter things and ways instea of only being against something.
All of the above may well be preaching to the pastor, but I'm no mindreader, and I have saw the swedish left wing extremists move from being an insignificant fringe to being parto f the mainstream in just two decades by simply integrating themselves into the system, and systematically promoting likeminded people in every party (they joined all the political parties), every agnecy, even in every organisation in civil society. And now they are inseparable from the governemental and societal fabric.
The Moslem Brotherhood works the same way. Peace, rights, poitivity, unity, integration, infiltration; accepting it may be decades or even a century or more until they are one and the same with the structure of power.
I believe libertarians have a problem preventig the from doing that, thus dooming them to forever being a rand phenomenon and just someones excuse and warning example:
Libertarianism is inherently and intrinsically egotist on an individual level. As long as that remains, any and all attempts will end like the one in Vermont a couple of years back. Note that the only defence of that experiment from pages like Reason and such, was rhetoric to the tune of "not real libertarians".
Heard that from commies 'til they wisened up.
Love your description of the Biden presidency! The imagery fits perfectly.
"And the GOP being the GOP, they couldn’t simply ‘replace’ it with a patient giving money to the doctor for services rendered like every successful industry in the country."
Including every INSURANCE industry OTHER THAN health insurance, the most heavily regulated and manipulated insurance industry by a country mile. Gee, I wonder if that could be why.
Yes, most Republicans are less bad than most Democrats. Why not step outside the politicians? Start with Dennis Kucinich for President, and Ron Paul for VP. Kucinich is a Democrat with genuinely libertarian tendencies. Ron Paul is the definition of libertarianism. Sure, Kucinich is old and may not live out his term. Unlike Joe Biden, that might be a good thing.
Boycott. Fake elections and fake candidates in a fake Republic.
The insurance companies and every element of the medical industry from the corporatized hospital systems to the pharmaceutical behemoths love Obamacare. In other words, everyone who caused the problem benefitted from the so-called solution. That will be true for any problem the uni-party pretends to solve. We need to break up the parties.
For 100+ years (with slight exceptions here and there) we get to choose between more-government and a little less more-government.
And here we are.
The two parties and their never ending kabuki are the froth on the wave, the permanent unelected government *is* the wave. For details, see: https://fletcher.tufts.edu/sites/default/files/pubs_glennon-michael-national-security-double-government.pdf
Can any of you comment on Chip Roy and Louie Gohmert, both of Texas. They aren’t my own reps so I’m not sure but they both seem pretty solid.
Well, I thought there was a general consensus across Substacks sharing the sensibilities of this one that we've got a Uniparty that strangles in the womb any candidate attempting to break for unpolluted territory.
I was enough of a moron to have voted twice for Bernie in the primaries, and he's proven as much a shill for the fetid swamp as any of 'em. Of course, joke's on me for thinking a "socialist" was a sensible choice under any circumstances.
I've said before somewhere, and will again, that the most important elections are at the micro-local level because they are the beginning of the journey for anyone really determined to have any sort of future in politics. The trick is to find, support and protect from smears and fake scandals genuinely independent candidates, starting with school boards, and ensure they can build a meaningful political resume so they needn't prostitute themselves to either party. This is a generation's work. Take your vitamins, guys.