Defense of the People
Cease to wage war on the people and their freedom.
Any government that wages war on its people and their freedoms is tyrannical and does not have its citizen's best interest at heart. We have seen this with many other governments like Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, and Communist China. All of these governments sought to gain and hold power by taking away freedoms from their citizens and then actually setting up systems to kill off segments of their populations that were considered a danger to the state.
Governments were originally formed for two specific purposes, to increase the power of the ruler and to provide an organizing system to assist people with things they could not do as individuals. The former systems were kingdoms, dictatorships, and any other system where the ruling class were not the people. The latter were representative and made up of regular citizens. Which system does the most good for the most people?
Currently, governments around the world are waging war on their people under various guises. In the United States, these wars are actually called that, though appearing to place the people's best interest first. These wars being namely, The War on Drugs, The War on Terror, and The War on Poverty. All of these have certain things in common: they limit the individual's rights, they are costly, they continue to grow in scope and impact, and they are generally ineffective at doing what they are said to do.
The War on Drugs was actually started in the 1930's before the term was coined. People used to be able to purchase various drugs, over the counter, from pharmacies and other stores with no real restrictions. Sure, there were users and abusers, but these drugs were generally pure in nature and the number of abusers wasn't higher than today. Currently many traffic stops, forced entries into homes, and arrests are related to policing drugs. Like when the Mafias grew under Prohibition, so too the Cartels have grown into well organized shadow governments with a hierarchy overseeing communication, intelligence, logistical, financial, and military branches. These various cartels have ties to official government and legal corporations. On the other hand, small time users and dealers are prone to being arrested.
That isn't so bad, right? In reality, due to the amount of money involved, traffic stops and searches become more risky to law enforcement, thus they are more likely to trample on the individual's rights in order to maintain their safety. Traffic stops aren't geared towards assisting drivers in remaining safe on the road, but often, any pretense, is used to take away the rights of the citizen. Tail light out? Traffic stop. Don't comply for a search of your vehicle? You must be hiding something. Warrant? No need. The Constitution is thrown out the window because it impedes the desires of law enforcement to earn money and prestige for their departments and themselves.
Are people hurt by drugs? Yes. Do people have the right to hurt themselves? They used to. Do drugs hurt others? Sure. Indirectly. Children of drug users can be hurt by drugs. Users seeking to get their next fix may steal and kill in order to get the money to buy their next high. How many people are hurt related to high speed chases, stray bullets, and the growth of gangs? Why are users having to steal money or work as prostitutes? Because of government intervention. The price of these drugs is really not that high, if only production, storage, and distribution is considered. Once one includes the risks of being arrested or rival gangs the price goes up. It is all about supply and demand, and the demand is not addressed.
What about The War on Terror? It has created the TSA, No Fly Lists, Warrant-less Searches, Several Wars, the Patriot Act, and allowed the NSA to spy on everyone with no warrants and no questions. Flying anywhere is now a major hassle. Does the security work? Not really. All the major catches were not the TSA finding bombs, but actually the FBI receiving tips or the individuals being under investigation because they had known ties to terror powers. Has the War on Terror actually made any progress? We are now in more countries than when we started. We have toppled regimes, bombed civilians, and spent huge amounts of money with an actual growth in terrorists. The rights of the people are regularly infringed with nothing to show for it.
The War on Poverty was also started under a different name, the New Deal and has been running under the radar because people aren't often arrested in order to enforce it. There are many government programs that are supposed to help those in poverty. In reality, due to their inefficiencies and the fact that they aren't truly geared towards giving people a leg up, but rather to make people reliant upon them, they are also ineffective. There really aren't any less poor people or homeless than were around when these various programs were started.
What is wrong with these programs? They feed children and women and those that have lost their jobs. If you are in need, there is an agency for that. The problem, is that these programs manipulate the market (e.g. USDA food programs) and take away consequences for those that make poor decisions. In fact people would have to earn more than minimum wage in order to make as much as they do via these aid programs. There is no incentive to get off of them. But really, the real problem is that it redistributes large amounts of money from those that work hard for it, not only to the poor, but also to the rich. If that weren't bad enough, this War on Poverty actually takes away basic freedoms of choice from citizens and forces them to pay into failing programs like Social Security and purchase insurance via the Affordable Care Act insurance windows, or face fines.
Protecting people from themselves is a dangerous proposition. If people don't even have the right to choose what they do with their own lives, are they any more than slaves?
Writes about politics from a Conservative Libertarian viewpoint. While pushing for a government that is Fiscally Conservative and Socially Liberal, he personally appreciates the Socially Conservative lifestyle.
Copyright R. A. Welkin