November 8, 2016
United States presidential election
As a country, our thinking about political parties has changed over the past two-hundred years or so years. In the beginning, both parties supported the formation of a federation of states. The support of individuals in anyone state was not without a wide range of disgruntlement, but the collective support of the states was obviously in support of forming a federation. The arguments ranged from wanting to retain colonial status, to the formation of as many individual countries as there were states, and to the collective security of a federation. Political parties moved from the question of, “should they shape a federation” to the idea of, “how best to construct the Federation”. My point is that both parties worked for the same objective, which was to form a great nation, which they did.
The great political division within the government then was as it is now; it was between two political philosophies, which were collectivism versus individualism. Keep in mind that they all wanted to from the best government they could. The idea of favoring individuals in government is drastically different from the political divide we have today. There is a modern movement to destroy the government in favor of 330,000,000 individuals ruling themselves. That people could believe this as a possibility is ridiculous; regardless, more and more sincerely believe this possible, which is why this presidential election is so important.
Gun ownership is an example. Ask many people why they own guns. Their first response is it is their constitutional right as individuals to protect themselves. They invoke examples of home invasion, rape, and other heinous crimes as mental images in which no one can deny the value of personal protection. They conveniently set aside reality equivalent to those asked in the cold war arms race between nations. Those doing the robbing, murdering, and raping have guns, so we “good guys” have to have more and bigger guns. We need a new world order. What our individualism, “I have a right to own a gun”, has done is created disorder that calls for restructuring social order.
As happened in the cold war, consider who is stirring up all the unrest concerning individualism but more importantly, consider why they are doing what they are doing. If there are 330 million people running around thinking they are individuals in charge of their destiny, who is the leader. It is a throwback to the primitive caveman situation. The strongest one is in charge. In modern society, it is no longer physical strength but economic power. You are a tough gun-toting individual who wants to buy a house, so you go to the bank and ask for a loan. The bank says fine, it will cost you 10% per year interest, you will have to pledge your down payment, the collateral you have in the house, your car, and your salary to get the loan, and if you default on one payment, they will come and take it all. If you want to send your child to college, and the tuition is $50,000 per year, a student loan is essentially the same thing. OK tough individual, who is in charge? What good does your big gun do you? What does all the freedom you demanded get you? The government is not there to say to the bank that they cannot do that. My final point is simple, which is that in America, you are the government. You are collectively there to say to the banks and loan companies, and people who want to drill for oil on your land, run a pipeline through your pastures, or contaminate your drinking water, that they cannot do that. By the way, Koch brother and Sheldon Adelson are the ones that say it is OK for you to have the right to demand to own an assault rifle. Now, do you understand why Koch brothers want to spend $900 million to convince you it is OK to vote for a new president, who thinks we should have no government, but you should have individual rights? Now, do you understand why Citizen United Decision is good for them but bad for you? Perhaps, it is a tax issue. Do you think they are concerned about you saving a few dollars on your taxes? No. It is that if you starve the government it will become small enough to drown it a bathtub. Now, do you understand why that is like committing suicide?
URL: firetreepub.blogspot.com Comments Invited and not moderated