Government "Solutions," Part 2

Government "solutions" are new problems in cheap disguises.

The chief reason that government fails is: it violates the "nonaggression principle."

Solutions are infinitely better, if they are achieved through voluntary exchange, cooperation, and just plain volunteering. Government solutions are poisons: mandates, regulations, "laws."

Name your elixir, but they are pretty much the same thing: libertarianism, anarchocapitalism, anarchy, voluntaryism.

It's Not A Freedom System; It's ...

Fascism. It's a hot-button word. Dangerous. Divisive. But I can't find another word for what our government is - or has been - turning into.

Socialism? Well, there are socialistic elements to it. The easiest description for the socialism we see in our country today is: socialism - a panacea for the angered masses. Socialism in our current government system is a tool - not the system. National socialism was a misnomer for Germany's style of fascism. And to put a fine point on it, here's what Gerald Celente said on Lew Rockwell's podcast January 4:

The entire game is rigged. I began by saying: "Too big to failed." The big corporations are in control. What is that? ... The definition of fascism, according to Mussolini, is the merger of state and corporate powers. The corporate powers are in control.

But Benito Mussolini provided us with a polite term:

Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power. (Brainyquotes.com)

But there is a problem. Apparently, Mussolini didn't say that. Oops. No matter. What fascism did was incorporate corporations into the state. That's like what the 14th Amendment to our constitution did, when it guaranteed - in a round about way - corporations personhood. Personhood was apparently granted earlier by Supreme Court decision. 

As a side note, states have incorporated marriage into the state by granting marriage licenses.

So what are we left with? Is the marriage of big business and big government fascism or corporatism? Well, it's not freedom. Let's call it statism. And I'll define it myself:

Statism - the marriage of the state with itself in an unholy alliance with any other power that serves the state.

SuperDuperMax USA Gets More Secure

John Stossel reports that the federal government decides that U.S. citizens cannot invest in Intrade.com prediction markets. Up until now - and I don't know when it started - banks were not allowed to transfer money out of the country on behalf of Intrade.com investors. Now our nanny-state/socialist-anti-constitutional republic has decided, through established regulation, that prediction markets are "commodity options," and that Intrade.com is doing unregulated commodity-option trading.

Government Crushes Innovative Online Prediction Market by John Stossel, on FoxBusiness

Take-Away Review: American Nations

American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America by Colin Woodard

I finished it. And it was a pretty good book, for me, since I finished it faster than I finish most books.

Colin Woodard definitely showed some of his prejudices - or at least his political slant, which is decidedly statist for most of the last quarter of the book. He criticized the "Dixie" block of nations for being against social welfare programs, environmental regulation, etc.

But Woodard did surprise at the end with a possible conclusion that I had considered for the future of our country. Our state might return to a loose federation or confederacy like it was under the Articles of Confederation of 1781. The central government would be limited to foreign policy, national defense, and negotiate interstate treaties. I don't know if that level of power would be low enough to satisfy me, or the component "nations" of a "reconstituted" state. But somethings gotta give.

The U.S. has a giant, bloated bureaucracy, giant, bloated redistribution and protectionist programs, a giant military that is deployed throughout the world, and no one wants or should pay for that unnecessary mess. I don't know if a revitalized regionalism expressed through resurgent "nations" would help fix the problem, because that might just transfer power from the federal government to the state governments. Also, the concept does not address personal freedom. But I do have a feeling that a weakened central government would do wonders for business, regional cooperation, and sovereign individualism.