A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
So. New York has become the next state to legalize “gay” marriage. The left is crowing and the right is mortified; promising to remove the offending Republican state congressmen who allowed the bill to come to the floor for a vote.
Strangely, this makes New York even more progressive than California, but less so than my home state of Connecticut which legalized same-sex marriage in 2008.
I am now going to offer my opinion. I couldn’t give half a flip less if I were on fire.
Every Moslem on earth wants to kill us. Every labor union in the country wants to bankrupt us. All politicians want to give my stuff away so they can buy enough votes from idiots on social welfare programs to be reelected so they can vote themselves as not falling under the rule of the laws they enact. These same idiot politicians are banning everything fun and enjoyable under the guise of “It’s for the children”. No smoking anywhere. No salt in your food. No fast food. No saturated fat. No hydrogenated oils. No fried food. No drinking. No speeding. No gasoline. No oil. No decent light bulbs. No nuclear power. No hydro power. No coal power. Only corn power.
Is any of this newsworthy? Nope. Our freedoms are being stripped from us one by one and all I read about in the newspaper and online is that gay people can now file married-joint on their 1040 form. Congratulations for that. I honestly hope you can all prove that the rest of us are too stupid to defy statistics with our 50+% divorce rate.
No one takes marriage seriously these days so I just don’t quite understand why anybody would think this is a victory; or why anyone would even care. It’s a tax status alternative. If this country has proven one thing over its short history it is that anything, once condoned and controlled by the government, will be fouled up expeditiously.
I’m becoming a stricter Libertarian every day. I’ve always considered myself a selfish [illegitimate child]. If what anyone chooses to do doesn’t directly affect me, I have never cared. With all of the bullspit flying around over the last ten years, I’ve pretty much pared my political position down to a single sentence. Here it is; The politics of 2Evil – “Don’t have sex with children.” Beyond that, as long as you take responsibility for the consequences of your actions and your actions don’t cause me grief, I really don’t give a rats patoot what you do to yourself.
Like smoking meth? Go for it. That will help with the welfare roles when you die much younger than you otherwise would have. Same goes for motorcycling without a helmet and smoking. Want to marry a goat? Hit it. (As long as said goat is of age, of course.) Want to take my guns or tell me what I can and can’t eat? See, this is where we have a problem.
You are not smarter than I am. You do not know what is best for me, and even if you do, I don’t care. Keep it the hell to yourself. I won’t tell you what to do with your life if you just leave me to my business.
Another discontinuity with recent national developments is that the enacting of the global healthcare initiative will only work if lots of people start dying much younger. Same thing with medicare and FICA long term. But all I see is dingbats in power trying to force people to do things that are “good for them”. Seems bass-ackwards to me. You’d expect that if the politicians were smart they’d encourage all the behaviors that would ultimately shorten people’s lives. Constituents are much less expensive when they’re dead. (And to top that off, everyone knows that the dead vote democrat.) Nope. Too many nosey, butt-insky advocacy groups that have too much money and fill the pockets of politicians through lobbyists to ever hope that I might be left in peace to do as I please.
It comes down to this: At the moment, about 45% of the people in this nearly-formerly great nation provide the full support for the other 55%. As we keep letting entire nations move their populace onto our dole, and encourage our own people to become addicted to government support of all kinds, eventually, that useful 45% will smarten up and either leave, or increase the ranks of the 55%. This is an exponential asymptotic graph that ends up with a “divide by zero” error at some point in the near future. (Edited to comply with statistical reality. - ASR)
Sometimes I wonder if there is anywhere left on earth to go where you might consider yourself even nominally free to actually do as you choose.
Now that I think about it thoroughly though, there probably never was.
- Comment (28)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (5)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Jul '10
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
This is America. If law makers tell an American that chocolate milk is bad for them, and ban it, the price goes up and Americans enjoy drinking it more. We have a chain smoking President and states cheerfully clamping down on a tobacco industry with ridiculous sin taxes, assuring that the millions of newly unemployed Americans under the regime can earn a living in the tobacco black market.
Nov '10
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
That's one heck of a manefesto, and it sounds like it would take more than a 16-pound maul to smash those babies flat. You are me when my blood sugar is low, and as high fructose corn syrup becomes less available...
Nov '10
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
Cool word-play. I agree completely with all severe, limited government desiderata you cite. Except you might want to consider the possibility of an inherent, inextricable link between traditional family (or the institution of marriage which inherently has both public and private dimensions) on the on hand, and limited government on the other. Saying as you do that all marriage should be privatized, you're also per force saying that there is nothing that is public. There is nothing that is common.
The only reason gay marriage ever came to be something that's even remotely conceivable is precisely because the unwritten laws of society, particularly the public shame following inappropriate activity, have utterly declined. Marriage as a public institution has in large measure already disappeared (caused by sexual promiscuity, no fault divorce laws, nonsensical child custody rules, and, most importantly, the obscuring of the separate roles of men and women, both in and out of the family). Indeed, same-sex marriage has only become plausible to the extent that marriage as a practical matter has ceased to exist. Same-sex marriage advocates likely will win the debate, but it can only be a Pyrrhic victory.
Sep '10
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
I think the closest you can get to complete freedom in the U.S. is to ride an unlicensed bicycle (or better yet, walk) to a part-time job working for unreported wages and live in a hotel room or the YMCA.
But that doesn't solve the free-rider problem, if you get very sick or something.
It is a tough nut to crack, that uncompromising and non-hypocritical freedom goal.
And, to top it all off, trying to sacrifice short term freedom for long term freedom (saving for an easy retirement) makes you unfree for the entire duration of the short term sacrifice.
Edited on June 26, 2011 at 6:44pmJul '10
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
"It comes down to this: At the moment, about 45% of the people in this nearly-formerly great nation provide the full support for the other 65%."
Um, 45% and 65% add up to, uh, 110%.
In all 57 states.
Edited on June 26, 2011 at 7:01pmJan '11
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
Kenneth: Um, 45% and 65% add up to, uh, 110%.
In all 57 states. · Jun 26 at 10:00am
Oh, so now "Big Brother" is gonna impose arithmetic on us.
Mar '11
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
2Evil4U you're not Karl Denninger in disguise are you?
Mar '11
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
Kenneth:
Um, 45% and 65% add up to, uh, 110%.
The extra 10% are the dead voters/illegals that the Democrats get to the polling station.
Dec '10
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
When Ben Franklin designed the Continental Dollar, he was enivisioning a less intrusive government.
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
Note: Some debate among the editors has been occasioned by the promotion of this post. I was the one who promoted it, despite finding much with which to disagree. I hate to sound like the product of a bad MFA program, but I was struck by the presence of what they call "a distinct authorial voice."
Other editors found found that voice simply too vulgar for Ricochet.
On reflection, they were right. The post captures a feeling of frustration I share, but it is not quite in keeping with the genteel tone we strive here to achieve.
So we edited out the more vulgar lines--but don't feel badly, 2Evil4U, I actually liked them, in a not-for-Ricochet way.
However, I do disassociate myself with the idea that all Muslims want to kill us--not because I'm too politically correct to state the truth, but because it's just not true. If it were, I wouldn't be living in Istanbul.
Dec '10
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
We called the places where one was nominally free to do as one chose "the frontier." People seeking that freedom crossed over the boundary into the unknown, uncharted and unsettled territory and sought to do as they pleased.
Of course, as soon as there was more than one person living in the same piece of the frontier, their respective desires impinged on one another's freedoms. America had long been a singular nation because it explicitly recognized that freedoms are necessarily limited by the conflicts between individuals' desires, and it explicitly recognized that the most desirable form of government was one that arbitrated those conflicts without attempting to eliminate the freedoms that gave rise to them.
America's government now attempts to eliminate conflict by crushing the freedoms that lead to conflict. Part of that -- maybe most -- is driven by the reluctance of its citizens to accept that bad things happen to people (good or bad). The motorcycle rider without a helmet may get a traumatic brain injury: we can't allow that (and we don't want to pay for his treatment)! So we mandate helmet use. What if we instead said, "Your risk, your funeral, pal"?
Mar '11
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
The Libertarian Delusion: ignore social ills because government power and debt is too important. Excelpt that social ills are inevitably tied to every issue of import to Libertarians. We're in debt precisely because of social issues. We have character issues because Americans don't want to own up to the fact that we're demanding our cake and the right to eat it too. We scream about taxes and debt but scream even louder when someone moves to cut our benefits. We have a social security and medicare problem precisely because we have a social liberal entitlement mindset. We think the world owes us something. We're paying huge sums in medicare, welfare, grants, etc, because we said that divorce was OK and that calling a kid a "bastard" was too judgemental, and that we shouldn't pick on that love child. You bemoan the war on drugs, and yet we deny that we have such a war because we tossed moral standards aside and became hedonists. If it feels good, do it, even if it gives you a disease that kills your immune system or wastes you away until your own mother wouldn't recognize you. Delusional.
Mar '11
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
While Ole Ben was very much for limited government, "mind your business" sounds more like a slogan promoting the virtues of work and thrift and industry, subjects close to Franklin's heart.
Jul '10
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
You're obviously confusing libertarians with liberals. I suggest you do a little reading.
Mar '11
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
"You're obviously confusing libertarians with liberals. " On social issues, there's not much difference now. That didn't use to be the case. When Barry Goldwater ran for president, Bibles were sold at his campaigns to raise funds. Over the past few decades, Libertarians have changed. With few exceptions, they're as socially liberal as Democrats. Budget issues are the only thing conservatives have in common with them any more. Modern Libertarians look more like Penn Jillete than Ron Paul when it comes right down to it.
Jun '10
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
Barry Goldwater also advocated for inclusion of open gays in the military.
Apr '11
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
Re Claire's note, nowhere but on Ricochet would we find this sort of transparency. The tone of the post was right at the edge of screed-iness, and I was pleased to see that the editors were moved to have a consultation about it. I don't mind that it was deemed fit to elevate to the main feed, but I would have minded if its tone had gone unremarked. There is a seriousness of purpose here that I find rare and invaluable.
May '11
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
Kenneth: "It comes down to this: At the moment, about 45% of the people in this nearly-formerly great nation provide the full support for the other 65%."
Um, 45% and 65% add up to, uh, 110%.
In all 57 states. · Jun 26 at 10:00am
Edited on Jun 26 at 10:01 am
I'll plead the fifth on that.(Or maybe drink it...) I'm an engineer. Math was never my strong suit. ;-)
Edited on June 26, 2011 at 11:22pmMay '11
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
Claire Berlinski, Ed.: Note: Some debate among the editors has been occasioned by the promotion of this post. I was the one who promoted it, despite finding much with which to disagree. I hate to sound like the product of a bad MFA program, but I was struck by the presence of what they call "a distinct authorial voice."
(Ellipsis by 2Evil4U to free up space.)
However, I do disassociate myself with the idea that all Muslims want to kill us--not because I'm too politically correct to state the truth, but because it's just not true. If it were, I wouldn't be living in Istanbul.
Wow. I can't believe that my first post was actually moved to the fore. I certainly didn't expect that. If I do post again, I will tone it down a bit as I knew I was probably pushing the limits of Ricochet. Honestly, the only thing that got me writing this morning was the constant focus by the media on things that really won't make much difference in the long run once we run out of money. I'm not sure why I'm surprised by that, though.
Apr '11
Re: A Simple Desultory Philippic (Or how I was Main Stream Politics'ed Into Submission)
2Evil4U:
It's the esthetics of same-sex "marriage" to which I object. We've already let homosexuals ruin (substitute verb in deference to the forum) the English language with "gay" - why let them have "marriage" as well?
I'm fine with civil unions for them, but marriage is between a man and a woman.