December 18, 2011
In my recent post I referred to the neoconservatives who have been destroying the Middle East and Asia as being on the Left and not on the Right. That is because they believe in government central planning, U.S. federal government expansionism not just of centralized government itself but stretching into and onto foreign territories (like communists), and they love to be at the controls of the socialist monopoly in territorial protection that not only doesn’t protect Americans but has been making us less safe and more vulnerable.
To me, leftism (if you don’t mind my calling it that) is collectivism and under that category are socialism, communism and fascism. On the other side, on the right is individualism that includes private property, voluntary association and voluntary exchange and voluntary contracts. If you want to describe capitalism as free market, voluntary exchange under the rule of law that forbids theft, fraud, trespass and physical aggression (except in self-defense), that’s fine with me, and individualism goes with that. Individualism goes with private property because, in that way of life, you own your own life, person, labor and honestly acquired property. However, under collectivism, the individual is collectively owned and sacrificed by the group, the community, the mob, etc. The scheme on the Left is that the individual is a slave of the collective. There is no private property under collectivism. That is what we have now.
If you want to go by the traditional left-right scheme in the social-cultural area, in which adherence to traditional moral values is on the right, then that makes sense to me given that collectivism on the left is immoral because of its immoral sacrifice of the individual and human life. That is another reason why the Bush-Cheney neocons are on the Left, not just in their love for central planning and government expansionism and socialist government monopoly in security, but because the collectivism of their immoral wars that they started, against Iraq and Afghanistan, were sacrificial of human life and liberty, overseas and at home. People need to recognize the shameful truth about the neocons’ continued seizures of private American workers’ and producers’ wealth to serve the corporate military-industrial-complex who contribute generously to political campaigns, the necons’ sacrifice of thousands of young Americans to serve the Bush reelection campaign and their murders of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, especially in Iraq. You can’t get much more collectivist than all that.
As I have written many times now, giving government bureaucrats a central planning monopoly in territorial security attracts the worst amongst us, those who are attracted to power. The power of State monopoly — with guns and bombs and the sacrificed soldiers employed to use them — is an awesome power, especially if the entire population is compelled by law to use such a service, with no alternatives allowed. All that such a territorial monopoly in security has accomplished has been those government central planning bureaucrats’ provoking foreigners, from Wilson and FDR to Johnson, Bush and Obama. If you take away the government monopoly and legalize competition in security, then those in that line of work will then have the incentive to actually provide the service that is promised. If they cause trouble, they will go bankrupt, get sued, or (one hopes in the case of Bush, Cheney and Obama) go to jail. Monopolists are not accountable. I know Ron Paul doesn’t agree with me on this (or with Murray Rothbard (more here), or Hans-Hermann Hoppe [.pdf] (more here [.pdf]), or Gustave de Molinari, or the Tannehills), but at least he is someone who doesn’t subscribe to this un-American idea that the U.S. government must be the world’s policeman or must trespass on foreign lands with its military bases or invade and occupy any country whose leaders do not obey the commands of the central planning U.S. government bureaucrats.
Now, at times it can be very depressing, hearing these talk radio know-it-alls going on about how “crazy” Ron Paul supposedly is, and it’s mainly about Iran right now. You see, Ron Paul is the lone voice of common sense and the only prominent politician who has been distinguishing between the State-pronounced propaganda (repeated by the LSM) and the actual factual truths. But the easily manipulated masses prefer to have something or someone to fear and loathe, some bogeyman of one sort or another, and the ones who want to have power over them play on that need, to the people’s own detriment. But Ron Paul happens to not be one of those who wants to have power and control over others. He wants everyone to have their freedom. The other pols do not want you to have freedom – the more freedom you have, the less power and control they have.
And Ron Paul is right, by the way, regarding how the government’s central planning bureaucrats and propagandists are doing the same thing now with Iran that they were doing with Iraq in 2002-03 (and with Iraq in 1990-91 as well). I had this page with many articles on these wars and the propaganda associated with them, and there have been plenty of articles in the past year debunking war-on-Iran propaganda (see here, here, here, here, here, and here for some examples). We are seeing the same thing with Syria, too. (This 2007 video shows Gen. Wesley Clark telling of a 2001 memo by the DoD in which the neocons already had the intention to invade “7 countries in 5 years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.” The psychopathic neocons with their delusions of grandeur want to “reshape the Middle East” in their desired, grandiose vision, these social engineering central planning government-violence nutjobs. But Ron Paul is the crazy one!)
But when people only get their news from CBS, NBC, ABC, MSDNC, Fox News, and the Roto-Writers of the New York Times, they will not get the truth, only State propaganda. As I have noted, the degree of naivete and gullibility of even the most intelligent individual is quite astounding. I have heard Michael Graham on the radio say that “Iraq was worth it,” although that was several months ago, so maybe he’s changed his mind now, but I doubt it. Like most of these radio warvangelicals, Graham has been very pro-war and anti-Muslim. Going to Iraq was the right thing to do, despite the fact that George W. Bush destroyed the country, hundreds of thousands of murdered innocent civilians (in addition to the hundreds of thousands of murdered innocent civilians Bush’s father and Bill Clinton were responsible for throughout the 1990s), and Iraq now under rule of Islamic Sharia Law. And now it’s on to Iran, for no good reason. “Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.” But, even though the masses know when their government officials are lying to them and all their past histories show that they are a bunch of liars and shouldn’t be believed, people still go into denial, and let the bureaucrats in control walk all over them.
Regardless of what the “American Exceptionalism” moral relativists say — that it’s okay for the U.S. government to invade and trespass on foreign lands and murder their people but it’s not okay for foreigners to invade or attack America and murder Americans — I will nevertheless continue to defend traditional Judeo-Christian moral values, particularly “Do unto others what one would want others to do unto you,” and “Don’t do unto others what one would not want others to do unto you.” The leftist neocons disagree with me on that, oh well.
And regarding Iran, much of the propaganda comes from Israel, and Benjamin Nutty-Yahoo (Remember the video that surfaced, in which Nutty-Yahoo expressed his true feelings toward the U.S.?). He is not rational, and probably subscribes to the Samson Option, in which, if the Israeli government believes they might be overrun, they will take the entire Middle East (and Europe as well) with them. Much of this has to do with that religiously fanatical [.pdf] belief in “end times.” (And Ron Paul is the “nutjob.”)
Finally, for those who are concerned about an extremist Iranian leader Ahmadinejad or rabid Ayatollah nuking Israel, London or the U.S., or concerned about any crackpot in general having nukes and his “finger on the button,” well, what do you think we have here in the U.S.?