Is It Too Late? Part VI – The Moral Issue
Date: October 24th, 2008
Category: Ideology of Freedom
Through the power of gradualism, the desires are rights mentality has become solidly entrenched in the American brain. As a result, the bribery approach has worked well for politicians, and they are not about to stop using it to their advantage. Long term, however, bribery does not work in a society founded on a political democracy, because people’s desires are infinite.
On the surface, this appears to be a pragmatic problem. At its heart, however, it is a moral issue — which is why political solutions won’t work. By moral issue, I’m talking about the broad acceptance of the absurd notion that if a person desires something, he has a moral right to it. Not one politician, not one media commentator, not one public figure has dared to attack this outrageous premise.
Politicians continue to fan the fires of class warfare, and our political democracy continues to mushroom into out of control buy off programs. We were reminded of this yet again when the usually smooth B. McBama made a slip of the tongue when talking to Joe the Plumber. To the horror of his handlers, he came right out and said that he wants to “spread the wealth around.”
We hadn’t heard anything that blatant since his pit-bull-with-lipstick partner came out with “Someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.” Don’t they make a darling couple? A newer, darker version of Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.
No one ever defined Marxism as simply and accurately as the B. McBamas did in those two statements. Now, of course, “Barry” is masterfully backtracking on his words, while Mad Mama remains pretty well muzzled by her husband’s win-at-all-costs handlers.
Still, as I said, this kind of “spread-the-wealth” bribery cannot work long term. What happens is that GAVEC (guiltism, angerism, villainism, envyism, covetism) ultimately destroys a nation’s wealth producing capacity.
Thus, in light of today’s political realities, the question remains: Is it too late for Western civilization to be saved? Or, more to the point, can we, as a people, rediscover the morals, ethics, and values that once served as the foundation of Western civilization?
To answer this question, let’s examine a few possible solutions.
The Muddle Through Solution
If you’ve ever had the experience of listening to an otherwise rational person insist that he is optimistic about the future of America, without giving any concrete reasons for his optimism, you were probably listening to someone who, perhaps unknowingly, believes in the Muddle Through Solution.
The Muddle Through Solution transcends fact and logic simply by maintaining that Western man will somehow find a way to work out his problems and muddle through. Times may get terrible … inflation may destroy currencies … there may be rioting and bloodshed in the streets. But, through it all, resilient Western man will manage to patch up the cracks and preserve his world intact.
I used to be tempted to take the easy way out and turn to the Muddle Through Solution for solace. What’s attractive about it is that it enables you to rid your mind of the multitude of seemingly insurmountable obstacles that presently point to a police state environment, without taking the pains to analyze their causes.
Whenever I find myself starting to believe that we might just manage to “muddle through,” I ask myself a one word question that most prefer to ignore: How? And the answer to that question is that there is no way to return to a moral society without taking specific action.
The problem with the idea of muddling through is that it’s a no action solution, which means it ignores the manifold egalitarian realities that are already firmly entrenched in our society. To be sure, life will go on if we muddle through, but not in the manner to which we have become accustomed.
For three decades, I have expressed my belief that, as our system continues to disintegrate, millions of people who have come to believe that their handouts are “entitlements” are going to become very upset, to put it mildly. To put it not so mildly, many of them will become violent, and a dictatorship is the preferred way of handling out-of-control violence. So called democracies are simply too inefficient to suppress nationwide uprisings.
Unfortunately, a majority of the population believes in redistribution of income and assets, thus the demagogue most likely to succeed in grabbing the reins of police state power will be an FDR type — i.e., a committed left winger whose eloquence makes his redistribution promises sound irresistible. And, guess what? A man who fits this description appears on your television screen nightly!
But the reality is that people do not “muddle through” under left wing dictatorships. Wherever you look for an example — the Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba — dictatorships that were cleverly masked as “people’s revolutions” have been eminently successful at keeping people under both mental and physical lock and key.
The attempt to muddle through will only mean more and more stopgap measures to prevent the thousands of government giveaway programs from collapsing. It will mean an increase in the phenomenon of GAVEC and the reliance of non producers on the effectiveness of lynch mob rule.
Charades like the recent bailouts, periodic announcements that “Social Security must be reformed in order to preserve it,” increases or decreases in the federal discount rate, government buying into banks, and increasing taxes on “the wealthy” will not only continue to fail, but will make matters worse. The reason for this is that none of them address the real problem.
Again, they all avoid the moral issue. They do nothing to abate the envy and covetousness of the masses. Instead, they rely on ever increasing doses of bribery — and, since the productive capacity of those who continue to produce is limited, they are destined to fail.
If a majority of people continue to believe that it is possible to muddle through forever, the United States is headed for a modern-day version of the Dark Ages. In truth, the Muddle Through Solution is not a solution at all. Rather, it’s an escape from reality. It is nothing more than a mindset of denial.
Next: The High-Tech Solution … and more.
October 24th, 2008 at 11:10 am
Hopefully, the “messiah” won’t be around since it’s looking more and more that he’s not a natural citizen!
See http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78671 . Thank goodness for Mr. Berg!
Dick
October 24th, 2008 at 11:21 am
You are dead-on in identifying the root cause to be an issue of morality.
Over the years, we’ve come to rely on science, technology and the resilience of our markets to help us somehow “muddle through”… and we expect this trend to somehow contine.
You’ve clearly shown that this is not a trend that will inevitably continue.
We can pour millions into trying to get J. McBama elected in an effort to prevent B. McBama from turning the USA into the USSA… we can pour trillions into a broken banking and market system… yet unless we address the underlying morality issue, it will all be like putting a band-aid on a gaping, mortal wound.
“My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge…”
October 24th, 2008 at 11:22 am
Robert,
while I agree 100% with your thoughts on muddling through, I fear that when directing this thinking toward mankind, or a large populace it loses its power as a means to describe the future.
To many people the large concept is just too difficult to visualize…and if they can visualize it, it’s sheer size makes them feel helpless.
However, in many of your writings you discuss personal responsibility. It is this personal responsibility that can be used to effectively explain “muddling through”.
I am a financial person…and have seen many people lose everything they have because of poor decisions in the past. This is a fact of life and does happen. What saddens me is that they lose far more than they needed to lose. In many cases, their homes could have been saved, their lives could have been restored, albeit at a lower standard of living, and their future could be planned for success. Why do these people lose more than was necessary?
The simple answer is that the failed to take action. They failed to honestly examine their situation and take action early enough to avoid the coming disaster, or if avoidance was not possible, to prepare for it and protect as much as they can. These people were both dishonest with themselves and chose to just “muddle through”.
I understand that it is very tempting to muddle through and not face facts. The truth often hurts, and requires acceptance that bad decisions were made (in very rare cases, unfortunate circumstances attributed to the problem, howver usually it can be traced back to bad decisions as well).
The muddle through approach works badly at a personal level. At a societal l;evel, it will be impossible…and with Givernment involved we will need a miracle of biblical proportions for the muddle through method to do more than delay the problem for a very short period.
Love your writings…keep it up, and continue being the voice we should all hear.
Best,
Randy
October 24th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Robert:
Thank you for your insights. Speaking of honesty, there is a Federal Lawsuit Berg vs Obama in which the DNC and Obama have admitted to Obama’s being born in Kenya, which makes him intelligible for the Presidency of the USA.
The DNS is a co conspirator. How is that for Moral.
ALl of the facts and admissions of the suit can be found at http://www.obamacrimes.com
I would be interested in your comments..
Keep telling the truth.
Ken
October 24th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Your Majesty:
Your total disdain for human beings who see complex issues differently than you, such as Obama or McCain do, will not bring about resolution of key issues of our time.
Mr. Ringer, you are an intellect who has fallen in love with vitriolic cant. You love the sound of only your own voice. You are right one hundred percent of the time,at least by your accounts.
But when I think of Obama, I see a man who does have ultra-liberal viewpoints – much like you adhere to Libertarian dogma – but I also see a man who can listen to varied viewpoints thoughtfully and admit when he is at fault in thought or deed.
You are the true pessimist because you think that seeing is believing. The truth is that believing is seeing. You can influence our next President, Barak Obama is his name, by voicing your concerns rather than nay saying everything you believe he stands for.
Your blog and the comments you publish are always one-sided in support of your viewpoint. You are, Mr. Ringer, the sophist’s sophist. You always take cogent thoughts and mangle them to your extreme viewpoint.
I read your articles because they do give clarity to issues. They are the starting point for reasonable discussion and resolution. But they are not the end all for how we must live and govern ourselves.
Richard Posner
Tokyo,Japan
October 25th, 2008 at 11:40 am
“By moral issue, I’m talking about the broad acceptance of the absurd notion that if a person desires something, he has a moral right to it. Not one politician,… has dared to attack this outrageous premise.”
Ron Paul has many times.
November 12th, 2008 at 2:18 am
Josh C. wrote, “Any solution that requires thought or sacrifice will be rejected by the masses. All we can hope to accomplish is to prepare those who choose still to think.”
While this is true, I am reminded that it does not take a majority of the masses to accomplish liberty for a nation. During the founding of this country, it was not the masses but, rather, a comparatively few who accomplished the job. There were traitors and Tories all around, loyal to the king, but the liberty-loving Americans who had taken the time to become truly educated were ready to sacrifice, and by their sacrifice, changed the world and established this great experiment in a government of the people, by the people, for the people. They even knew that the time would probably eventually come when this government would have to be overthrown and re-established, as the tendency of government is to grow out of proportion.
So rather than worry about the masses, let’s each focus ourselves to doing the hard work of a Liberty Education – reading and discussing classics and learn to truly think, so that we, too, can take a stand for freedom in our arena.