Mutually Assured Destruction

Whenever you hear the term “mutually assured destruction” it conjures up memories of the cold war between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R.; when both sides nuclear arsenal assured both countries would be destroyed regardless of who fired first.  The firepower on both sides served as a deterrent to start a nuclear war.  Survival depended upon a certain level of respect and understanding from both sides.

The United States finds itself in a similar situation today.  The country is being lead down the path of destruction by the Republican and the Democrat parties.  The two parties collude with one another resulting in mutually assured destruction.  Inevitably, both parties are more concerned with keeping power, getting re-elected, advancing an ideology, and furthering their own ambition and avarice.

For the most part there are minor differences between the Red and Blue teams.  Ultimately, those differences results in the growth, size, and power of government.  Both teams deficit spend.  Both teams increase the national debt.  Both teams expand entitlements.  There is a quid pro quo between the two teams where they agree not to touch the sacred cows of the other team.  Don’t go after welfare programs and we won’t go after defense programs.

The path to mutually assured destruction is littered with pieces of the Constitution and our debased fiat currency.  Unlike the respect between the U.S. and U.S.S.R. during the cold war, we live in an era were the ruling class from both parties has absolutely no respect for the Constitution or sound money.  When government disobeys the Constitution then those in power reject the Rule of Law and embrace lawlessness.  The ruling class has the audacity to believe citizens should respect the law while the ruling class repeatedly violates the law.  Moreover, the ruling class uses the law against the people to plunder property and demand compliance.

Obamacare is a perfect example of the ruling class acting lawlessly.  And, lawlessness begets lawlessness.  Why should the citizens respect and obey the law when the ruling class acts lawlessly?  After the Obamacare ruling I thought about what the Constitution should say if we could turn the clocks back to 1789 knowing what we know today:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Ha, you were punked!  Anything goes.

If mankind is to respect the law then only respectable laws must be enacted.  Both parties are guilty of acting lawlessly, violating the Constitution, and participating in a monetary system that is destroying the currency.  We can debate policy issues like how much to spend or how much to tax, but ultimately these are mere distractions and sideshows to the kabuki theater going on in Washington, D.C.

Government has become a leviathan.  An enormous entity bereft of principled leaders bought and paid for by special interests and those seeking some advantage through the power of government.  Lobbyists, industries, associations, corporations, and unions flood the coffers of the ruling class in order to advance some piece of legislation, secure a tax break or subsidy, gain a competitive advantage over others, etc.

People erroneously believe there is too much money in politics.  The problem isn’t money in politics.  There will always be money in politics regardless of the laws enacted to prohibit it.  The problem is the size of government.  Naturally, if you reduce the size of government you reduce the power of government which means less influence can be bought by special interests and wielded by the ruling class.

One of our founding principles is the consent of the governed.  Obviously the governed are the people. Today the government is not of the people, by the people, and for the people.  Instead, we have government of the special interests, by the special interests, and for the special interests.  Perhaps I missed history class the day the Declaration was discussed where all governments are instituted by the consent of the special interests.

It is in the best interest of the ruling class to divide the people and pit one political party against the other, to pit friend against friend, neighbor against neighbor, and family member against family member.  Consequently, the party in power rules in a manner disagreeable with half the country.  When the losing party regains power it becomes their mandate to rule in a disagreeable manner as well.  Meanwhile, government continues to exercise unlimited power and is aided and abetted by nine politically connected lawyers in black robes.

Because the ruling class disobeys the Constitution the people act accordingly.  Most people don’t care what is or is not constitutional.  Instead they care whether their party wins, their issue wins, and whether they can get enough lawyers appointed to the Supreme Court to establish legality.

There is a divide in the country.  That divide is between the ruling class and the people.  It is not between the left and right, liberals and conservatives, or Republicans and Democrats.  It is the ruling class pitting the people against one another to ensure they retain power, are re-elected, and advance their agenda.  As Dr. Tom Woods says, “the two parties are a different wing of the same bird of prey”.  If the ruling class is the predator, guess who is the prey?

People need to recognize government for what it is – raw power.  The answers are not found in D.C.  Neither Romney nor Obama are the solutions.  The solutions lie with the states.  To reverse course and alter the path of history we must focus on state based solutions.

The people do not have to participate in the game of mutually assured destruction. If you recall the movie War Games, the computer finishes playing a game of global thermonuclear war and says, “the only winning move is not to play”.  That’s my advice, don’t participate in the mutually assured destruction game.




Filed under Constitution, Philosophical

2 responses to “Mutually Assured Destruction

  1. Of course in the U.S.\U.S.S.R. scenario of mutually assured destruction, except perhaps for a few insane individuals, no one on either side truly wanted the destruction to take place.

    Our wise leaders currently don’t have that same outlook. As long as they’re not the party in power when the true meltdown takes place, as long as they’re not standing when the music stops, then they’re o.k. with a cozy little meltdown because then they believe their party can be swept into power. They’re truly that shallow. They truly are political animals that care so much about power that they’re unable to view things clearly. Power will do that to a person.

    Unfortunately for them, and for our country, when the tsunami hits voters aren’t going to be looking to elect your typical R or D to magically fix the problem. No, they’re going to be looking to someone with such an extreme message either left or right that the typical D.C., business as usual politicians are going to get swept away in the flood. We can only hope that extreme voice is coming from a limited government, fiscally responsible, mucho liberty individual (funny how those beliefs would be considered fringe, but nowadays that’s the reality) and not something dark and sinister.*

    *See 20th century megalomaniacs for further reading.

  2. Clearly, I’m a firm believer in the “citizen candidate” idea. One can only imagine the change in political landscape if a common patriot– one whose only special interest was that of the Constitution– were to be elected to the presidency. Our nation is founded on the principle of representation. Yet, for decades, only the wealthiest have even been considered to hold the responsibilities of representing the people, but the wealthiest among us certainly do not understand the toils of the common people. They do, however, well understand the toils of the wealthy, which is why their efforts almost always seem focused on helping the rich get richer while the poor get neglected.

    Obamacare is an example of a when a rich leader makes an effort to address the poor– rather than teaching the people how to fish so that they may eat for a lifetime, he instead gives them a fish for the day so that they may become dependent on others for their survival. Some say Obama is just trying to guarantee Democrat votes with Obamacare. There is a degree of truth in that. More likely is that Obama is rooted in the idea of hand-outs. His career and education have been given to him by others. Welfare– grants, scholarships, donations, affirmative action– they are the means by which he has succeeded in America. As such, they are the means by which he believes others will succeed.

    What more can we expect of a President Romney? True, he is a man who has run businesses, created jobs, saved jobs (to use an Obama term). But does he understand what it means to save a dime– as in driving an extra five miles to get gas ten cents cheaper? Does he know the pressure of losing his job because his employer can get the same work done by an illegal immigrant for half the pay? Does he understand the pain of seeing the government take a chunk of his paycheck to fund a Social Security program that may not be there when he retires? I firmly believe that he will do a great job of managing the in’s and out’s of big business and make life much, much better for those who shake his hand during vacations at Martha’s Vineyard. It is for those of us who cannot afford wine that I am most concerned.

    It’s too late this time, but please do your presidential search for Matt Snyder and other “common” folks who seek to better the lives of our citizens through mutually assured prosperity.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s