How can people know that the state is a powerful club, yet still believe it to be omni-benevolent?
Why do people continue to believe the government exists to help them when the phrase, “I’m from the government and I’m here to help you” is known as an irony to one and all?
How can anyone think their health-care system will improve once it’s operated by the kind of people who run the DMV?
—–
What do you do if you’ve already enacted your own personal austerity regime and you’re still not making it?
Why will some people glibly answer that question with, “Get a better job!” In this economy? You kidding?
Would I eat my dogs if things got really bad?
If I died and nobody noticed, would the dogs eat me?
Well, of course they would, but the real question is would I then be remembered forever as “Claire? Oh yeah, she’s the one got eaten by her dogs”? (For the record, I’m not the slightest bit bothered by the prospect of my dogs eating me, but I’m horrified at the thought of being remembered that way.)
—–
How come pot growing was so much simpler before Washington v*ted to make it legal?
Why don’t people get that, if you’re going to have “public policy” at all, this is the principle on which it must stand: “I think the burden of proof in public policy should fall on those who seek power rather than those who seek liberty; in short, there should be a presumption in favor of liberty.” — Art Carden (Which may also be the most brilliantly succinct statement of minarchist principles ever uttered.)
“How can people know that the state is a powerful club, yet still believe it to be omni-benevolent?”
Most people don’t think about it. A world without government is as inconceivable as one without sunlight and gravity. They don’t even have the words to consider such a scenario. Government enters their thoughts only if they see a way to use it for their own ends. The rest of the time their thoughts revolve around family, job, friends, television. Important stuff.
“What do you do if you’ve already enacted your own personal austerity regime and you’re still not making it?”
Really tough question. One I’ve thought about–even though I make more money than I need for my reasonably simple lifestyle. I’m not even close to having enough savings to stop working. What happens if my company folds? Can I make it on a WalMart greeter’s pay? I’m a lousy networker; I’m not sure I could give up my semi-hermit lifestyle and share a house with someone else.
On a personal note, reading those words in your blog made me sad.
On your last question…that’s what happens when government legalizes something instead of simply decriminalizing it. For crying out loud, the plant is a weed! You can probably grow it by accident.
Lately, I’ve been pondering much of the same. Over the last couple of weeks I’ve been having conversations with friends and family and when we discuss those very things you’ve mentioned and a few more, I’m met with silence and a blank stare, and then sometimes a standard cable news-generated weak opinion.
If I were a bit more paranoid than I already am, I’d swear that their brains have been altered, lol. They are incapable of accepting the idea that gubmint is not on their side, no matter how fed up they are with the current admin. They still believe in the system. That includes the governing system and the medical system.
We are always one paycheck away from utter destitution and have lived this way for a long time. No matter how much we cut back, prices keep going up. I try not to think about it too much.
To most people life without government is inconceivable. Visions of Mad Max fill their minds if you force them to consider such a horror. I don’t see any way to bring the light to the masses. Some people get it on their own the rest never seem to rise out of their stupor.
Not sure what to do if one’s means are insufficient to meet one’s needs. All of my life I have planned for the future, never spending more than I have and always keeping something in reserve for emergencies. I don’t know how to live any other way. My life style is austere by some standards but very comfortable by mine. It’s all a matter of what you want out of life.
I’m not looking forward to government health care. I have recently been on the receiving end of my health insurance policy and this year I payed 45% of my income to medical services providers. There is more than enough red tape involved as it is. We don’t need the DMV folks taking over but I see no way to prevent it at this point.
In the 70s I thought for sure that pot would be completely legal by the 90s. After all, our generation, the generation of the 60s will have taken over the reins of power by then and set things on the right track……freedom and justice, and all that. Somehow that didn’t work out quite the way I expected it to. 😉
Well, it IS a weed… and during the bi-centennial there was a “grass-roots” campaign to throw seeds out the car window into ditches… where weeds flourish in ideal growing conditions. LOL… “those were the days”…
The two topics: personal austerity and gov “help” are linked in my way of thinking. The more gov “help” there is (with their cookie-cutter, one size fits all blueprints) the more personal austerity there is. And my scary thought is: I think the gov knows this… wants it… and it’s intentional. I tell myself to rein my paranoid imagination in, but every day brings more concrete evidence of this, that I can’t pretend is paranoia anymore.
And while it means that life isn’t happily boring anymore (understatement of the century)… I kinda resent having to think of all the different ways I need to protect myself from this kind of multi-faceted assault on my peace of mind, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness… from those charged with upholding that same thing for all of us.
Perhaps it’s true that most people don’t think about the issues or, “How can people know that the state is a powerful club, yet still believe it to be omni-benevolent?” but so far, every person I’ve met, and the subject in some way has come up, they have a ready reply which indicates they have thought about it more than just a little, and THAT blows me away, especially when whatever I say just seems to go in one ear and out the other.
It does seem like their brains have been altered, same as the rat with the parasite which causes the rat to no longer fear the cat.
I wonder if I would prefer the people who never think about such things at all? I should try and find one.
So far, the closest I’ve come is people with the “silence and a blank stare, and then sometimes a standard cable news-generated weak opinion.” Gag me.
Also, the bit about the dogs was kind of funny.
On the bright side, at least you’d be remembered.
Claire? Is that you posting? Really “is known as an irony to one and all?”, are you sure?
People think of the state as an extension of THEMSELVES. They KNOW they can control this, that, and the other thing and make everything wonderful for all people in all time, and they just want to punch the state buttons which put that huge robot on their course, executing their will. Hey, mommy dearest can sure run a tight household, she knows she can run a state too.
I may be a hateful prick, but I love to laugh at those types as their kids grow into teenagers and explode out of control.
I just wish the mommy types were required to live through that before voting, holding office, or otherwise forcing their will and viewpoint on the rest of us.
“How can people know that the state is a powerful club, yet still believe it to be omni-benevolent?”
Rick had it—they don’t. For the most part, they believe they’ll die without it. The altruistic claptrap is just their way of shielding themselves from the awareness of what they’re doing. As with most things philosophically altruistic, there are a zillion ironies in that.
“What do you do if you’ve already enacted your own personal austerity regime and you’re still not making it?”
You just keep cutting and cutting, always making the best of it. Combined with wits, that’s usually sufficient. In the rare case where it’s not, then eventually you jump ship. At some point even the open ocean is more appealing than the Titanic.
The majority of people don’t relate one problem with the other. If they have a public school crisis in their community they don’t connect it to a government-inspired policy at the top.
They can’t relate health-care to the DMV because they are two different institutions, at two different levels of government. Irony doesn’t follow the phrase “I’m from the government and I’m here to help you”, because the bad vibes came from isolated instances (Katrina, etc) gone astray under the stress of the moment.
“What do you do if you’ve already enacted your own personal austerity regime and you’re still not making it?”
Suck it up… and do without. (And prep as hard as possible.)
I think the pot-growing problem is funny–because it was inevitable, and the solution is so obvious: get the hell out of drugs entirely.
If it’s ‘illegal’, you have the War on Drugs; if it becomes ‘legal’, you have regulations the government doesn’t know how to implement properly due to its perceived complexity (and we all know that govpeople are pretty simple-minded). If ALL drugs were unregulated, it would soon find its natural level, including private, neutral regulatory sevices such as Consumer Reports or UL safety standards. (But that would put FDA out of business, and place “undue hardship” [sarcasm] on the pharmaceutical companies, wouldn’t it?)
“What do you do if you’ve already enacted your own personal austerity regime and you’re still not making it?”
Bunch up.
Get a boarder or two or six.
In the meantime, determine why roommates never work.
Just a thought.
I don’t think you would be remembered as “Claire? Oh yeah, she’s the one got eaten by her dogs”. More likely you would be, “Remember that crazy recluse lady down the street that got eaten by her dogs?”
The easiest way to cut down on drug use it to make it legal and let the government regulate it. Applies to medical care as well.
I was thinking this morning about the fact that most people, at least those raised the last 30 years, were raised and taught that authority, no matter how big or petty, must be obeyed. Whether it is an HOA, elementary school administrator, local cop or Fedgove, authority must be obeyed. For the most part the entertainment industry backs that up with indoctrination about all the draconian things that will occur if you do not obey.
I too subscribe to that “presumption in favor of liberty” thing, and regard it as the most fundamental of all moral and legal principles. It is the presumption against the use of force or fraud. (What are the 10 Commandments about if not this?) It is the Presumption of Innocence, which I take to be the defining essence of libertarianism. I much prefer this archaic principle to the so-called Non-Aggression Principle, because what constitutes “Aggression” is famously dependent on more fundamental principles, and our response to bona fide aggression and the extent of the force we use in that response should also be guided by this Presumption.
I don’t regard the Presumption of Innocence as a “minarchist” principle, but as an anarchic principle. Anarchism is not pacifism, but the disbelief in Authority, in Rulers. “Governing” does not require any false pretense to Authority beyond whatever Justice inheres in the acts of the “governing.” Indeed, Authority is the enemy of the Presumption of Innocence, because its real purpose is to “justify” what the Presumption of Innocence forbids.
“How can people know that the state is a powerful club, yet still believe it to be omni-benevolent?”
Because some of them believe god establishes government, and they believe that he wouldn’t set up something inherently evil. Some people are so silly.
“What do you do if you’ve already enacted your own personal austerity regime and you’re still not making it?”
I don’t know. I used to know a guy who was rich. He couldn’t understand why I wasn’t rich, too. He kept telling me that making money was the simplest thing in the world. So simple he could no more explain it than explain exactly how to walk- you just do it! I have about decided I have my own anti-prosperity field surrounding me. And it’s getting stronger. But, I’ll survive until I don’t.
Oh, and about the “presumption in favor of liberty“- I just say I “assume liberty”, until someone says different.
If someone has enacted a personal austerity regime and is still not making it, then they probably haven’t fully enacted an austerity regime.
I have a few homeless friends. None of them were homeless by choice, but now it is a lifestyle and one they probably won’t abandon. You don’t get much more austere than a homeless guy in the desert. What they don’t have is, mortage or rent, cellphones, computers, utility bills, running automobiles etc.
The couple I have befriended also don’t have drug or alcohol habits. They will work for cash when they can find work, scrounge chow out of dumpsters and forage the local flora for edibles. Neither beg, but will generally take assistance if proffered. One lives a pretty much sedate life, the other hitchhikes all over the country, seldom staying long in one place. The one thing they have in common is that they both had productive succesfull lives at one point, that spontaenously disassembled on them and they have adapted and survived.
I thought of water lily’s comment, “I’d swear that their brains have been altered, lol.” when I came across this perspective:
“… The government uses collectivism to make people deaf, dumb, and blind to what is going on. And believing in what the government is dispensing to them, the people fail to notice that corporations, in concert with government, are stealing and poisoning their way to a level of control that would have made the ancient pharaohs stand back in awe.” …
http://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2013/04/09/mind-control-the-shell-game-and-the-stealth-gods/
Also, Matt, another. Your homeless friends seem more like hobos than homeless people. I read something somewhere that there is a huge difference between the two.
IAM, you are probably correct on whether or not they are homeless or hobo etc. I don’t spend muc time considering others definitions. One wanders and I would classify him as a vagabond, the other lives in the in-between spaces within town and I would consider him classically homeless. We have quite a few others around as well. Some are families living out of cars, others have small hard to find camps in the desert. Some are just down on their luck and working hard to improve, others prefer putting their few resources into drugs or alcohol and won’t last terribly long.
“What do you do if you’ve already enacted your own personal austerity regime and you’re still not making it?”
Get a better job.
Most everyone is stuck with government so if we realize they are a club held over us the best solution is to stay under the radar so to speak. When government fails chaos in more likely than “philosophical” anarchy.
When you have already have enacted personal austerity and still can’t make it you might try falling back on family or “clan” if you are lucky enough to have a link. There is community in the form of neighbors helping one another, local food banks, local church programs, etc. Then the option is to go into survival mode. Some time ago Clair had a link to some one who was through the troubles in eastern Europe who told about cooking up greens from the back yard. The idea is to “keep body and soul together” until times change.
As far as the medical system is concerned it would be wise to study natural and herbal healing as well as basic first aid and trauma care. The “System” is under strain any way and peopleoin the edge may have no choice but self care. Maybe you can get advice from the “grannie” down the road- part of community help as practiced in the past by “wise women” and “hedge witches”. Serious stuff may have to fall under the government system and don’t think health insurance if you are lucky enough to have it isn’t part of government.
I’m not sure how our philosophical anarchists will take this but “no man is an Island”. The human is a social animal and has been successful because we work together to solve problems and overcome adversity.
Regarding “What do you do if you’ve already enacted your own personal austerity regime and you’re still not making it?”
This is what I’m trying to do right now. It seems to be effective at the moment. However if circumstances change I may have to come up with something else.
This plan was crafted to work with my own unique situation. YMMV
My house and property are paid for.
My vehicles are paid for.
I am digging my way out of back utility bills. I only have one more to catch up on and this will be accomplished by next July.
I have no credit cards.
When I receive my monthly stipend from the .gov I pay all of my monthly bills. No matter how much it hurts. I don’t rationalize an “I want” or try to play the “Well, If I put THIS one off until next month, I can afford THIS…”game.
Once all the bills are paid I count up the remaining days of the month and divide the remaining amount of money by that number. This gives me the amount per day I can spend until the first of the following month when .gov recharges my account again.
When I have a day that I don’t spend my daily amount, that amount goes immediately into savings. I manage my accounts online so this is a relatively simple matter. If I happen to go over my daily amount I carry the extra over to the next day and put the next day’s reduced amount into savings until the extra expense is amortized. Then I go back to the regular daily amount and continue putting that into my savings account.
My savings are only used for emergencies or to get me out of the hole a little faster. When I reach $100.00 in savings I pay an extra $50.00 toward my utility and property tax arrears. This is in addition to the payment arrangements I have in place.
I’ve got a small but growing nest egg and I will be completely caught up this year. Then I will enroll in my utilities budget billing plans to ensure that I pay the same amounts every month with no seasonal variations which will help with long range planning. Once I accomplish this, it is my intent to REALLY pump money into savings.
This is what I do..but as I said YMMV.
Ramped it down as far as it would go, years ago. Now, we are watchin the gophers, thinking maybe this will not last much longer. At least when the dogs eat, they come back and remember, that would be at least a little respect, and a memory, for those that still have cold and wet noses,
When those with political power, no matter how much or how little, think of those whom they rule over(which is seldom), they think of them as resources. Not individuals. Not people. Not livestock. Resources to be exploited. To be used for the maintenance or advancement of their power. If you cannot or will not be used, you will be removed to make space for those who are useful.
Howard, RE: “no man is an Island”
You might want to have a look at this article to get a better understanding of where things stand. Here’s a bit of it:
“… the state is a community of coercion, it must be diluted, emasculated, and chained. Strong families, churches, and businesses tend to do this. When left unhindered, they tend to assume most of the legitimate responsibilities in human society: nurture, education, bread winning, communication, health, transportation, wealth creation, and so forth. Just remember: in principle, what these communities do, the state doesn’t get to do. And what the state does, these communities don’t get to do. Why should we want the family, church, business, and other non-political communities to assume these responsibilities? Because these other communities are voluntary and non-coercive. You can (when of age) walk away from a family. You can walk away from a church. You can walk away from a job. But in today’s Western world, try walking away from the state. Because these communities are voluntary, and non-coercive, they always do a better job of fulfilling their responsibilities in human society than the state does. These communities (collectively called “the private sector”) invariably do a better job in educating a society’s young, mending its ill, transporting its goods, feeding its hungry, and policing its morality than the coercive arm of the state could ever do.” …
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/sandlin4.html
“Philosophical anarchists”? No, it’s the real deal.
I thought of Howard’s ““Philosophical anarchists” comment while reading this other comment:
“… I’m not trying to do away with any particular regime or ruler, but trying to do away with the BELIEF in the horrendously destructive superstition of “authority.” And if the majority doesn’t believe that myth, then it’s next to impossible to dominate and enslave them. Ultimately, the problem is NOT that nasty people believe in “authority,” but that otherwise GOOD people believe in it. Fix that, and tyranny is finished.” …
http://ericpetersautos.com/2013/03/21/clover-taxonomy-ii/#comment-83559
“Ultimately, the problem is NOT that nasty people believe in ‘authority,’ but that otherwise GOOD people believe in it. Fix that, and tyranny is finished.”
Nice…that’s the whole thing right there. Good will always triumph over evil in the long run, but hasn’t a chance if nobody knows what the good is.
Two words: “cognitive dissonance.” Humans do it a lot. Governments capitalize on the tendency.
I wouldn’t be too hard on those still in the Matrix. People are what they are. Deal with it. Also, when the economy crashes, a goodly number will wake up.
Oh, and Claire, you don’t have to eat your dogs, ever. You can trade them to someone else who will eat them. 🙂
Claire, you’re not alone in feeling all of these things. My heart is weary from fighting these issues at a local level for many years. But I guess “Don’t grow weary in well doing” is the slogan we should live by.
I also agree that it’s the “Good” people that worry me more than the “Bad” ideologues.
Thanks for all you do in helping us out here with accurate thought on all of these issues.