Same Old Song
Tibor R. Machan
Meg Whitman is running for governor of California and I haven't a clue what her chances are. I know I don't want anyone like Arnold to get elected but then I don't want hardly anyone to be either reelected or elected. And Meg Whitman gives a good example of why.
Her ads on California TV stations are all about giving stuff to people. Yes, her big, novel, revolutionary political pitch is to provide more and more stuff to the electorate. She says so explicitly in her television ads. No bones about it, nothing about principle, nothing about throwing all the lobbyists out, nada. It's all about stealing from these citizens and handing the loot to those. How else are you going to do more for "the people"?
And this pattern is repeated all around the country these days. No one even pretends to stand for a principle of justice that is to everyone's equal benefit, like making sure there is no more debt citizens are stuck with. No mention about refusing to place members of future generations in debt even though, contrary to a major American founding principle--no taxation without representation--such a policy is glaringly perverse in this country.
Why can't Ms. Whitman come up with something really different when she claims to offer us change? But then so did Mr. Obama who now seems to be going down the exact same road that George W. Bush did, deficits, debt, entanglements in foreign wars, the continuation of the war on drugs, etc., etc.
It is not in my philosophy to construe politics innately corrupt. There could be decency there, yes, provided the idea the American founders had were still what would guide those running for office. Politics should stay out of our lives and only do what referees do at a game, make sure the rules are followed. The rules, in turn, are to act peacefully in all realms of our lives, no exception. Yes, yes, on some very rare occasions someone may deploy just a bit of force, as when a hysterical uncle needs to be restrained. But that is a very rare exception indeed, and so would be the use of coercion in a decent society, especially by the government the job of which is to secure our rights, period.
Ms. Whitman, however, is no agent of serious change but is going to continue the widespread destructive governmental habit, promising to redistribute wealth just like all the other politicians are trying to do, thereby impoverishing the country--including the state of California in spades--at every turn.
Of course, it would be a mistake to think that the American people, including the bulk of California's citizenry, are innocent. Most are, after all, the ones who invite the likes of Ms. Whitman to run for office instead of someone who is committed to weaning us of the governmental habit.
Back when Arnold got into the game I actually was stupid enough to vote for him, but only because I considered The LA Times's efforts to discredit him by writing a story on the eve of his election about how he frolicked on the set of some of his movies. Well, I figured, that was such a low blow that I should come to his rescue! Dumb move; no good reason to vote for someone. Rash. I will never do that again.
But any other basis for selection from among current candidates seems even worse since all they do is offer themselves up as your hired thief rather than someone else's. Yes, that is the ploy of most of them--"free" health care, "free" insurance, "free" maternity leave from your job, "free" unemployment compensation, etc., etc., all of it anything but free, of course, but all put on the backs of others and of members of future generations.
Maybe some day there will be a citiznery that will repeal the authority of politicians to engage in all this larceny. Maybe. But do not hold your breath because that governmental habit is a very powerful one.