Consider this an open thread for opinions (are we still allowed to have opinions?) on the theories of big government, or statism, most often advocated by the left, to that of a smaller, more decentralized government most often advocated by the right. I found this article from Red State columnist John Hayward to be not only humorous but poignant as well. Here’s an excerpt:
Statism is an inherently pessimistic philosophy. Its core assumption is that people will not do the right thing, if left to their own devices. Private workers, investors, and managers are tried in absentia, found guilty of callous greed, and sentenced to life in Big Government’s work-release programs. Government is force. There is no need to force people to do what they would have done willingly. Therefore, the core assumption of activist government is that people must be forced into socially beneficial activities they would not have freely chosen. The much-mocked Pajama Boy ad for ObamaCare was a visual Freudian slip that revealed the truth of how liberals view their child-subjects. Virtually everything the Left says to American citizens is the language of adults addressing children, right down to the new obsession with making sure we eat good food.
One other thing that John touches on, and something that has always annoyed me, is the perpetual state of crisis that leftists love to manipulate and beat people up with.
It’s an old statist trick to phrase every item on its agenda as an “emergency” or the “moral equivalent of war” to stampede voters into compliance. If this rhetoric is taken seriously, and in total, it tells us that our nation is perpetually in crises, eternally in needed of rescue from persistent “emergencies” it can never resolve on its own. What upbeat message can be found in that?
Indeed. Gong from crisis to crisis sucks the life blood out of anyone. In this respect, leftist governments remind me of that dysfunctional, mal adjusted, drama filled person we all are familiar, who is always making bad decisions and constantly in search of the next life change that will finally make them happy. Of course happiness most always eludes them, as does social justice and income equality always elude the leftist pursuit. Why? Because it’s impossible to reengineer the human condition, and it is impossible to legislate equal outcome. Two things that I wish more progressives understood – wealth is not a zero sum game, and life is unfair, and both concepts are adversely affected when over legislated.