be careful what you wish for

While I have committed that I won't do politics here (I have the Rants for that), I did say I would do cultural issues and I think we are looking at a very big one right now. It is how government is seen by disparate groups. It is what the answer is to unfairness-- assuming there is an answer. It is what do we do now or is it too late?

Tocqueville-- Piketty debate on economics

Yes, Tocqueville put out his treatise years ago while Piketty just put out a book which is selling gangbusters especially to the liberal world as some would say communism is our only hope. And by communism, I mean the philosophy of dividing up the wealth, not the current rendition which frankly proves that communism doesn't last much longer than capitalism-- neither of which are actually in a pure form.

I have not read Piketty's book but from what I have read about it, he's addressing how we got to where we are which is heading toward an oligarchy. The goal of some is to take us back to feudal times where the wealthy control the world for the good of all *cough cough*. The question has to be asked-- if the truly powerful in terms of money are to be blocked from taking over-- how can it be done?

If you spend much time reading comments on any sort of political or cultural issues of our day,  you learn a lot about how the right and left see the country and its problems. One view that comes out constantly from the right is how the federal government is a corrupt and evil body which is trying or has taken over our world.  Federal government is to them an invading force that must be overcome. I thought of an analogy for how I see it and how differently that is from the right.

The government is us. It is who we elected, who we donated our money to put in office. The government is made up of citizens. True, some are very removed from the reality of real life in the United States, but they are not outsiders. They are us. The mentality that they are someone else is how Terry Nichols and Timothy McVey felt it was the right thing to blow up the federal building in Oklahoma City. What ended up happening with most of the dead being babies in a day care center, I guess that was just collateral damage to that kind of mindset. Where did that destruction profit their cause, which is posse comitatus? The cause didn't go away as we have seen with Cliven Bundy and his vigilante supporters who are eager to shoot those who work for the government. It has gone underground at various time but again pops up in other equally destructive ways-- like refusing to pay grazing fees on leased land.

The analogy that I came up with for how I see government is the disease of cancer. Some see it as an invasion but it's not. It's when the cells in the body go rogue. Cancer is us. It is inside us. We have to treat it that way to get rid of it. 

We can do that to the government if we see it's doing wrong, setting in place laws detrimental to one of the United States' founding principles-- a government for the people, by the people

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...

When you see the government as outside of you. When you have decided voting doesn't work but terrorism does, when you want to throw out your existing form of government by revolution, watch out for what comes next. When you talk about government as being evil, when you support not voting to change things but those who want a more violent answer, well, in the end you get Oklahoma City bombings or others like it which can come from the left as well as the right. Terrorism is based on killing to instill fear and get your way. It's not about logic.

Logic says that we can vote. That if we convince enough people that our way is right, we can bring about a change because this system of government was created with ways to make changes. But it's not what appeals to the emotions and hence you had right wing yahoos claiming that Cliven Bundy was a patriot. You had him saying he didn't recognize there was any federal government and then turning around and riding his horse with a United States flag on a pole streaming behind him. 

Cliven Bundy became one of those caught up in being a celebrity, a folk hero created by the likes of Sean Hannity, to appeal to those who fear that the 'other' is taking what they have. The fact that it's actually him who has been taking what they have, is not something they consider. He is 'them' even though he's not. 

Personally I think this tactic works because so many have given up on logic and are relying purely on emotion. It's how one of those sheriffs, who they would like to have running everything said-- when they come at us shooting, we will put our wives and daughters out front to be killed first and then the nation will see our cause is just. Seriously, it's the gist of what he said. And a certain right wing mentality supported that. After all what are women-- collateral damage if they can win the cause by having them killed or hurt. Who supports that kind of thinking-- those who believe in posse comitatus-- and if you don't know what that is, look it up. Cliven Bundy was about a lot more than land use.