Where the ‘Power Lies’

Ronald Reagan once said, “Concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty,” but as a notable laissez-faire, classically liberal economist, he certainly wasn’t speaking of corporate greed and the ‘too big to fail’ mentality. He spoke of the philosophy embodied by an over reaching federal government that taxed every moving thing, regulated those which survived, and subsidized the problems it created. Sadly President Reagan is unable to comment on our current economic situation, but one has to wonder what his stance might be given that the power present corporations yield over taxpayers proves limitless time and time again.

Private sector corporations have been deemed too big to fail and taxpayer money has been spent rectifying their mistakes. Present day robber barons continue to pursue sociopathic realities that take advantage of their own countrymen and ignore their plight through exorbitant bonuses, lavish retreats, and office remodeling. And yet, with these examples, and others too numerous to list, some argue that the government, by proposing to  protect its citizens through increasing oversight and regulation, is becoming too powerful or ’socialist’.

Maybe I missed the revolution or misunderstand our founders’  intentions, but when did corporate fuedalism become ok?

Sphere: Related Content

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed! Make sure to follow on Twitter! Comments/love can be sent here. Thanks for reading!

Republican Government: Good Intentions, Failed Results?

Henry David Thoreau once said, “That government is best which governs not at all.” In the land where anything is possible, where you carve your own path and create your own destiny, no other thought could sum up the attitude toward government any better. Many people credit this philosophy of self-reliance and individualism as traits that made American people great, drove us to work harder, and held us to a higher standard of success. Each election, we choose between those we feel will govern more and those who will govern less. Democrat or Republican, neither candidate campaigns on extraneous government, exorbitantly high taxes, or restricting individual freedoms. On the contrary, we are promised less interference, fewer taxes, smaller government, and more rights for the individual, but despite our eventual choice and the promises made to us, we make little progress in these pursuits. No matter the leadership, the government spends more, grows in size, and becomes more powerful. Individual rights are infringed upon for the ‘greater good’ of the nation and hard earned tax money is frivolously pissed away by men we only see once or twice a year on programming we’re not always made aware of. It should come as no surprise that Americans still hold on to the thought, “That government is best which governs not at all.” Rightfully so, Americans are weary of their relationship with the government, because the government by and large has lied to them over and over again without remorse. And so, each election cycle, we are faced with the choice between those we believe will govern less and those who will govern more. No matter our choice, logic…

McCain Fires Campaign Manager, Hires Hitler

Populism, as defined by the dictionary, refers to anti establishment or anti-intellectual political movements or philosophies that offer unorthodox solutions or policies and appeal to the common person rather than according with traditional party or partisan ideologies. Historically, populist rhetoric has been used by fascists to manipulate a poor and downtrodden population by espousing yet disguising appealing, socialist principals and policies to gain the support of those who under better economic circumstances would ordinarily oppose charity Marxism. In times of economic turmoil, populist rhetoric is especially effective for fascists because it allows them to disguise their own inherent elitism and prejudice by rallying against the established ”privileged elite”, likening them to socialists or communists. This sort of rhetoric creates a very nationalistic, us vs. them mentality where the us is the hard working, unrealized American dreamers of like-mind, and the them, are those wishing to take the possibility, no matter how far-fetched, of achieving that dream away. In this way, fascists can justify increases in the size of government and the control it exerts over its people as fundamentally, for the people, while at the same time vilifying others who wish to do essentially the same.

The difference between true socialism and fascist populism lies in the subtlety of who will benefit from the proposed increases. Socialism, in a true sense, tries to extend infinite benefit to infinite population, but requires the benefit of the state to take precedence over that of the individual. Based on irrational fear of lack of personal freedom in socialism, populists will assert that new  progressive governments are no different than previous attempts at communism, where government is shaped like a pyramid and only the top benefit. Fascist populism  seeks to create the perception of a  similar resource redistribution as those they vilify, but differs in that it creates the illusion that…