I believe it was Winston Churchill who said when battling a deadly epidemic it is not necessary to give equal voice to the side of the virus.
In political debates I often hear that we must give both sides equal credence and that the arguments of both sides must be considered with equal weight. We must compromise, find the middle ground, give both sides something. I reject this notion absolutely and completely when the issue involves any increase in government power over our finances or personal lives. You must be aware that an increase in government power always comes at the expense of your power. Any diminution of your power must be proved to be overwhelmingly justified. It should not be a 50-50 burden of argument. It should be 90-10. The default setting should always be on leaving us alone. Overriding that default should be very difficult. Once personal sovereignty is lost to the government it is never peacefully returned.
Just because some charming politician can win a popularity contest it doesn’t mean that they know better than you about about how to live your life or use your wealth. It is not wisdom, altruism or duty that drive these people. It is vanity. They think they are so smart that they have the whole thing figured out. Everything would be great if we just do what they say. Well I say look at how well they’ve run the government and, in many cases, their personal lives. I think a high degree of skepticism is in order when they come asking for another piece of your life.
The important thing to remember is that they need us to carry out their agendas (usually to pay for them). Those of us who promote the side of leaving people alone don’t require the participation of them or anybody. There should not be a “balance” between the needs of the government and the freedom of the individual. We need to keep a heavy thumb on the scale to bias it strongly in favor of individual freedom because your freedom trumps their “good” ideas by a mile.
Post a Comment