Deep Thought         Consider...

Allegory Of The Cave (Plato’s Cave):  Socrates describes a group of people who have lived chained to the wall of a cave all of their lives, facing a blank wall.  The people watch shadows projected on the wall by things passing in front of a fire behind them, and begin to ascribe forms to these shadows.  According to Socrates, the shadows are as close as the prisoners get to viewing reality.  He then explains how the philosopher is like a prisoner who is freed from the cave and comes to understand that the shadows on the wall do not make up reality at all, as he can perceive the true form of reality rather than the mere shadows seen by the prisoners.

This website is committed to turning over rocks, one by one, as carefully and responsibly as possible in the quest for truth.   WE do believe in truth, and we will expose whatever we can about the growing tide of oppressive and self-serving wheeling and dealing that's not revealed honestly to the people in the public square.  The goal is to shed all the light we can by way of this truly public forum.  This site is edited by ordinary citizens with no "chips in the game," save the wholesome and constructive instinct to preserve everyone's rights - to remain as free as constitutionally possible, to simply pursue life, liberty and  happiness without coercion.

---

Left, Right, Liberal, Conservative

If you listen to most political chatter, you hear about the left wing and right wing, and how liberals are more “progressive” and conservatives are “regressive,” or fascist, suggesting that fascism would be on the far right, and socialism and communism would be on the far left.

That is wrong.  Fascism is socialistic, with government owning the means of production, and managing large sectors of the economy, and thus, people’s lives.  A far more sensible representation of the political spectrum would put totalitarian government on the far left, and zero government on the far right.  In fact, that is how the founders viewed it.

On the far left, you have total government and zero liberty (monarchy – one ruler, or oligarchy – rule by a group). On the far right, you have zero government (anarchy) and, presumably, total liberty.  Or do you? Anarchy is very unruly – every man for himself.  It quickly turns into mob rule, or a brutal oligarchy – tyranny.

The founders sought a way to maximize individual liberty and self-determination, while still maintaining order. They felt that by providing just enough government to prevent anarchy, but not enough to allow government to become illiberal and oppressive, they could achieve a balance in which citizens were free to manage their own affairs without having to worry continuously about protecting their life, liberty or property (something in the yellow-green area).

By ratifying The Constitution of The United States, We the People ceded certain powers to the government (as described in the Enumerated Powers of The Constitution), to exercise on our behalf.  Thomas Jefferson said, “The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.”

Similarly, citizens cede certain other functions to their local governments, such as police and fire protection. This relieves citizens of having constantly to guard and protect their property. However, we have now reached a point in history, in which one group of people wants to use the force of government to make other people do what the first group wants. It is human nature, but it is illiberal and oppressive, and we must resist the temptation.

It matters not if the first group wants to help the poor, or save our souls, or the environment, or if it simply dislikes capitalism. The founders provided the First Amendment as a means for one group to persuade another group to subscribe to their religion or their political, social or environmental philosophy. Still, the second group has the liberty voluntarily to accept or reject the very strongly held ideas of the first group without coercion.

In short, the first group may not tax or regulate the second group into compliance with the first group’s agenda under the penalty of law. It does not matter how attractively packaged, or whether it is supposed to be for the good of society, the needy, or the planet. C. S. Lewis said, “Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.”  This website is committed to shining a bright light on such oppression.

Self Determination

Most people have a strong desire for self-determination. As children, our parents gave us “free” housing, “free” food, and “free” health care. They told us how and when to use the toilet, when and what to eat, where we could go, and when to be back. While most of us required, and eventually appreciated the guidance, it became tiresome once we learned the drill. So when we reached adulthood, we left our parent’s home and set out to make it on our own. Now, when we want their help, we ask for it. 

 Treating us like children, government now wants to give people “free” housing, “free” food, and “free” health care. Based on the illiberal’s axiom that every good idea needs to be a law, the government tells us what kind of toilet we can use, which food and drugs are safe to eat, what kind of car to drive (by controlling what kind of cars manufacturers can make), where we can drive (by putting us on road diets), what kind of light bulbs we can use (by controlling what the lamp manufacturers can make). Government is infringing on our self-determination at every turn. Our freedom cannot withstand this death by a thousand cuts.

“Free” services are rarely free. Your parents, or the taxes exacted on other, more productive citizens, provided you with “free” room, board and healthcare. You may have noticed that the providers of these “free” services feel justified in controlling your behavior.  When someone provides “free” health care, they will attempt to protect their “investment” by mandating certain behaviors, diet and exercise. With the responsibility to provide for your own needs comes the freedom to determine your own lifestyle.

As adults, we have the ability to assess risk, and make decisions for ourselves, even if we make decisions that the self-anointed experts consider wrong, or even self-destructive. But the fact is, right or wrong is in the eye of the beholder. That is why we have the First Amendment.   Anyone is at liberty to try to convince another to join his or her religion, but I am at liberty to reject it.

There is a good reason that congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.  As responsible adults, we have the liberty, the freedom, of self-determination.  Think carefully about what you give up in exchange for government mandated zero risk and free stuff.

The Rise of the Praetorian Class

WE ran across this brilliant article by Pete Kofod over at Casey Research. This may not sit well with some conservatives, who view the police and military with reverence, but WE actually think this article has as much or more to do with bureaucracy. This is so relevant to what is going on today, even right here in Whatcom County. Maybe especially here in Whatcom County. 

Much attention has been paid to the “disappearing middle class” and the “vanishing American Dream.” While the observations are largely accurate, they are also misleading. The traditional three-tier model of the upper, middle and lower class broadly categorizes people according to income and net worth. One significant problem with this model is that membership in any particular class is very much in the eye of the beholder. One man’s “scraping by” is another man’s “opulent living.” This subjective and arbitrary grouping and boundary assessment inevitably gives rise to the simmering class warfare that is starting to rear its ugly head in many Western countries. Such categorization is therefore meaningless at best, if not outright deceptive as it conflates a variety of economic actors.

The chief fallacy of this model rests in the fact that it focuses on how much those actors are compensated, as opposed to how and why they are compensated. A far better perspective is perhaps gained using two classes, the Political Class and the Economic Class, with a third class emerging.

The Butcher, the Baker, the Candlestick Maker – The Economic Class

The Economic Class, at least in the United States, has historically been the numerically dominant group, although in recent decades its dominance has noticeably waned. The economic class would traditionally be called the Private Sector, but even that term has become misleading for reasons we will delve into later in this article.

Members of the Economic Class provide goods and services that are voluntarily sought by consumers and paid at rates that the market will bear. In an unfettered environment, the economic class would count farmers, engineers, coal miners, artists, physicians, janitorial staff, security guards, merchants and company executives among its membership. They participate freely and competitively in the market place, using the economic principles of Division of Labor and the Law of Comparative Advantage to increase the wealth of society as well as improve their personal position. Capital, entrepreneurial and human resources are brought together collaboratively to meet the needs of the market place. This is standard Economics 101 fare and hopefully generates little controversy among the readership. The important factor defining Economic Class membership is not the amount of money a person earns but rather their participation in the free and open market.

The Lazy Highwaymen – The Political Class

Like the Economic Class, members of the Political Class are not properly defined by their wealth but rather by how they exert influence in the market place. Whereas members of the Economic Class engage the market openly and voluntarily, members of the Political Class employ coercion and deceit to achieve their economic objectives. The coercion and deceit may either be exerted directly or, as is increasingly observed, through a variety of proxy agents. The most obvious members of the Political Class are, unsurprisingly, politicians. This group includes elected individuals at every level of government as well as various appointed officials.

In addition to this primary membership category, a second distinct group exists within the Political Class. It consists of various advocates including lobbyists, influence peddlers and miscellaneous other supplicants of government cheese. These creatures exist to serve as envoys for the third distinct group, which is made up of a patchwork of commercial entities that have learned that employing a politically well-connected pitch man replaces the need for an effective sales and marketing organization and in some cases even the requirement to have a desirable product.

Furthermore, it is commonly observed that members of the Political Class routinely migrate between the three aforementioned groups. An unfortunate consequence of allowing these economic actors to “cut in line” is that the rewarded event becomes the prevailing trend. Because of that, there is virtually no industry that has opted out of the rent-seeking game. From the military-industrial complex to agricultural subsidies, to the utterly corrupt banking system, the Political Class is inexorably claiming an increasing share of the world’s economic activity, a highly disturbing trend indeed.

Subsidized inefficiency, intentional destruction of productive assets and confiscation of property are but some of the effects that are observed when the Political Class employs force to serve those that are “more equal than others.” The arrangement can be summed up by saying that economic activity within the Economic Class places the bargaining power in the hands of the buyer whereas the economic activity within the Political Class places the bargaining power in the hand of the seller. This gives rise to dislocations in the free exchange of goods and services as well as widespread misallocations of capital as businesses adjust their practices based not on the normal mechanics of supply and demand but rather based on the dictates of the Political Class. Over the years, the scale of the intrusions of the Political Class into economies around the world, and very definitely here in the United States, has grown to the point where truly free markets are now the exception and not the norm.

Because the Economic Class operates in the realm of voluntary exchange whereas the Political Class employs force to achieve its objectives, many of which are anathema to the Economic Class, it follows that a significant amount of resources must be dedicated by the Political Class to the enforcement of their objectives. This role has traditionally fallen on the wide array of military and law enforcement organizations as well as numerous regulatory agencies and departments.

From the US military’s role in protecting the Political Class’s global interests and the IRS keeping the Treasury full, to the FDA serving “Big Pharma” and various law enforcement agencies maintaining a low-level chronic fear in the populace, the level of physical control that the Political Class needs to extend over productive resources is staggering. And in lockstep with the virtually unchecked growth in the Political Class, so has grown the size and scope of the enforcement branch deployed to protect its interests.

Paradoxically, for reasons I’ll touch on momentarily, the allegiance of this enforcement branch belongs to neither the Political Class whom they serve nor the Economic Class whom they “service.” In time, their level of influence grows to the point in which they become a class of their own. They are the Praetorian Class.

WE can't quote the entire article right here, but please read the whole thing ...