Casting Bread Upon the Water: 'Canadian marxists, stay away from me/ Canadian Marxists, Obamao let me beee'

Well, this a bit of an odd post for me, a response to anonymous responses to the Tartan Marine at "The Old Jarhead", who recently posted a very good, if exceedingly pessimistic, comment about our many fast approaching disasters. An anonymous commenter, purportedly from Canada, has already prompted a few of my famously longwinded replies, but his latest drew triple the length than Blogger will allow me to vent in the comments. It concerns something I have been wanting to post on though, that of pleasant, well meaning people, who misplace their generosity and consent into the hands of thugs, who turn them into weapons against us all. So while not wanting to burden the Tartan Marine with my hemorrhaging of HTML to begin with, I'm going to move my reply from there, to here, as a post of it's own.

Let me set it up a bit first though with a bit of the preceding comments which began with Anonymous venting off a bit about the wonders of Canada and the ignorance of Americans, as in part,

"...Its all waste on insurance paperwork, premiums, blah blah blah, middlemen who add no value.
When will the US public get smart enough to embrace publice healthcare ?
Not soon I hope because it still leaves a huge competitive advantage to manufacturing in Canada because all healthcare is already covered..."

Always up for a bit of recreational slamming, I replied, "Riiight. It was nice to see your Prime Minister recently putting his heart into that message. ", which prompted a bit of pickiness from the anonomai,

"It was the "Premier/Governor" of Newfoundland(a province/state, kinda like Maine, who went to the US for heart treatment; not the Prime Minister/President.

Whlie I agree with most of your statements, I wish you'd grab a bit more intell before you make statements that make you look..........un-informed."

Uhm... it's Canada... I am uninformed about them, and intend to stay that way. If their prime premier needs to go to a country most of the Canadian politico's and media denigrate, to take advantage of the health care system we still have, because they've already destroyed their own in their country, and yet still speak so smugly about it and themselves... not to mention the fine example of free speech practice they performed on Marc Steyn... last year(?), or Ann Coulter last week... why would I care to get more informed than what can be unintentionally gleaned from a half overheard sound bite?

Now, if you want to chat about the U.S. Constitution, or Western Civilization in general, I'm there for you, but Canada? Take off eh.

Which unleashed a torrent of northern slights without the benefit of a single enter key,

"...America (as wealthy and prosperous as it is) is the only nation in the industrialized world that does not have some form of national health care plan for ALL citizens. And somehow the media and right wing conservatives have brainwashed the public into believing that a national health care plan (aka socialized medicine) is bad. What is so terribly wrong with ensuring all Americans have access to basic healthcare? Surely other Western nations can't ALL be wrong. Yes, it's expensive - but it's better than what America's got. Treating "socialized" medicine with such disdain - as if it were somehow inferior - is mind boggling. I suspect the average American has no clue what socialized medicine even means - talk about conservative propaganda! The ability to go see a doctor ANYTIME for ANY REASON and get medical attention regardless of how big your bank account is what socialized medicine means..."

,and on, and on and on. Get the picture?

So I replied, that I realize this might be difficult for a nameless aninnymouse to follow, since it requires thinking of more than one concept at a time, or rather it requires you to realize that one concept is deeply integrated with another concept, which is deeply integrated with another, and so on, but what is wrong with 'ensuring all Americans have access to basic healthcare', but the very least important issue is that it can only be done by forcing all Americans to purchase something they may not want - which is pretty darn bad all it's own.

Another slightly more important issue, is that the sudden flood of demand, with no increase in supply (the hours Dr's & Nurses have available, the facilities within which to see patients, etc), without the self regulating mechanism of those 'visits' costing anything, results in long lines, stressed care providers (who are receiving no incentive or compensation for the increased demand on their time and effort), less input from Dr's or patients as the 'system' tries to get things under control by saying who will receive what, why & where, and eventually rationing of one sort or another. Perhaps you Canadians enjoy your little raffle's to see who will get to see a Dr.... Americans? Not so much.

Which brings us to

"I suspect the average American has no clue what socialized medicine even means - talk about conservative propaganda!"

Forget about the 'medicine' part, and try focusing on the 'socialized' part, do you have a clue what that means? Or have you bought into the candy coating of getting goodies "ANYTIME for ANY REASON"... FOR FREE!!!.

There is nothing that is available for free. And the biggest cost of the attempt to act as if there is, is that you lose your right to your property, to control over your life, and give over your liberty to live your own life, to the vagaries and whims of those who have the power to decide what you can do, where you can do it, how much you can pay or be paid for it, but most of all you lose your right and ability to live your own life by your own decisions - without that, it is not your life that you are living!.

That may be ok for Canadians, your ancestors were too pansyish to stand up to the King George, you are probably just fine with being well cared for house slaves. We on the other hand, are Americans, and we are not ok with giving the responsibility for our own lives over to bureaucrats to plan out in exchange for their favors and best wishes.

Take Off!

"Sure we do...but how is this any different from waiting for your HMO to approve treatment?"

Who do you think devised the current HMO's? Private business had just about discarded them as wastes of money, when Govt proposed them... to improve healthcare and control costs. Care to bet what the result was?!

Oh, and I'd be happy to offer a quarter so you can buy a new ENTER key."

Well that actually brought about a decent reply from him - still wrong, but reasonable... it didn't lack the SHIFT Key. He said in part,

"That system you've put so much faith in, does'nt deserve your faith. BOTH sides of the equation need re-evaluations/re-construction in the worst way. They need a tertuary competitor.

It's corrupt from the ground up. Rotten to the core. Many people, though pure at heart,are mis-led, by thier love of the nation. "

To all the anonymai out there, I think you mistake what I put my faith in, and I assure it is not this or any system, certainly not how they are regarded and operated as today. While I do have a very high regard for the U.S. Constitution, it's not for the document itself, but for that which it is the finest expression of to ever have been attained by Man. The ideas it represents, those of Classical Liberalism (and by that I mean a very long line of development going back through Adams, Burke, Smith, Blackstone, Locke, Aquinas, Cicero, Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, Sophocles, Aeschylus, Homer and a myriad of tributaries), which ultimately recognizes what is best and briefest expressed as,

• "... 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..."

Over the last 20+ years of studying the roots of that in history, philosophy, literature, economics and politics, I've come to recognize that when Government is used to sway, prevent or mandate that it's citizens act against those choices which they would otherwise make (and were not themselves improper), it infuses into 'the system' rapidly spreading rings of error, falsehood, stupidity (though as a consequence of being unaware of the ripples, the decisions that are made as a result of them have the appearance of seeming 'smart'), and destruction which spreads through the peoples persons, relations, economy and culture.

Think of it as the Dark Invisible Hand of statism, that is opposed to Adam Smith's Invisible Hand of the Free Market.

This is an important point to grasp, I do not oppose any of the many variants of socialism & statism on the basis of any party or patriotic affiliation, but because I see them to be, at their deepest root, not only wrong, but evil. And yes, I'm very well aware that the vast majority of those supporting such measures are completely unaware of this, and are intending to do nothing but good. However, 'you know where' has a very fine road leading to it, paved with just such intentions.

I am also very much aware, through opened eyes and hard knocks, that the Principle that may be perceived in operation, is not necessarily the only principle involved, or even the most significant. I am very aware that at any time it may become apparent that I am missing something of importance, and I am always checking and self checking to see if that's the case.

Oedipus's high intelligence and self assurance should be a warning to all (One warning I've noted here).

"So you consider Canada inconsequential, maybe others see America on it's last legs.

Maybe the two nations should work together. Like they're doing in Afganistan.....as we speak.
Arrogance, is often confused with insecurity. Ever heard that?"

I'm also well aware that Canada, during the Great Depression, experienced little or no bank failures, while the actions of FDR's cocksure USA ensured the failure of thousands of banks and lives. Looking around us today, it seems as if we have not exactly learned much from that lesson. But have you Canadians learned from it either? I would love to see not only Canada, but the entire 'Anglo-sphere' working together, and I've no interest in putting "U!S!A!" above other nations for no other reason than I live here, I see these, and all other nations, in relation to those ideas I mentioned above, and those who corrupt or oppose those ideas, I'm confident will be reaping their own doom - ourselves included if we persist in them.

I don't hold that opinion out of arrogance, or promote it out of insecurity, but because all that I have experienced and learned, shows me that it is true. I would be eager to be proved wrong.

Unfortunately, it hasn't happened yet.

Which brings us up to the latest anonymous comment which I see not only coming from this Canadian anonymai, but from the left in general, from here and abroad. It's a view that America 'was once good', but is now bad - not because of it's vices (pragmatic foreign policy, socialistic/statist leanings, tendency towards moral relativism), but because of it's Virtues. We are today condemned, sniffed and sneered at because of those virtues we still cling to, principled actions, a foreign policy which believes that freedom, liberty and property need to be defended, and that those who assault them must be stopped and/or destroyed. The belief that Govt has no business being our substitute brothers keeper, that the Free Market and objective law rooted in a clearly stated and understandable Constitution, unchanging except by amendment, are the highest of ideals and not errors to be apologized for. And finally, far from the apparent beneficence which they foolishly believe National Healthcare to be, it is nothing but the means to disintegrate and destroy all of our Virtues.

Obamaoscare healthcontrol law is a vile evil which we must expunge.

So while the anonymous can and do say such seemingly fine sounding things such as this,

"I see deeper motivation in all this. I see a movement that not only involves the collapse of the US, but the collapse of democracry world wide.

Many people, myself included, see America, as the bastion of democracy. If America is lost.....then , also, is the idea of democracy,"

It is not the Virtues of the American Republic they are showing concern for, but for the disintegrating, anti-American proregressive statism which they see us fighting against.

Their concern is that the virus might be harmed, not it's host. Which is particularly disgusting and alarming when they then say something like this, that,

"Freedom loving people, world-wide, must know this, and rise, together to prevent the collapse of America."

Don't they wish. But the sentiment reveals something which they completely miss, and something which they, knowingly or unknowingly, believe, that America is the result of it's government, that passing laws can lead to prosperity, that more rules can create the materials which made us the most powerful nation on earth - they actually believe not only that Might makes Right, but that Might can create Might. It cannot. It can only feed parasitically off of the wealth which those few freedoms it allows, manages to produce.

They spend a great deal of time and effort on ignoring the fact that America did not rise to it's position of prominence and power because it was a massively regulated Bismarckian State, quite the opposite, America became America, because it's Govt stayed the hell out of the lives and business of Americans. Americans once knew and understood the importance of the ideas which it's Constitution was founded upon, and they insisted on those ideas not being violated by it's Govt. America is, was, and always will be (if it is to continue to be) a nation of Ideas.

America cannot be propped up with anything less than ideas, and that can only be done so through a sizable portion of the populace understanding and revering those ideas (to one degree or another, not everyone needs to be expert, some will need to fully grasp them, and some will need only the sense of it, as long they understand their importance and can and will pursue further detail if needed and pressed).

And just as importantly, the results of those ideas: our famed optimism, morality (much less visible today, I grant you) and generosity - are in fact results of our ideals,

• "... 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..."

, and they cannot be willfully and consistently engaged in as if they will somehow produce their own foundation, as if tidying up the Penthouse will magically produce the skyscraper below it. The current focus of Glenn Beck on promoting "Faith, Hope and Charity" as a means of restoring America, is very disappointing, and frankly Stupid. Those very American traits only came to represent us, came to represent a Nation and it's people for the first time in history, because of the ideals those people first held and practiced. Thinking that we can recreate our National Character simply by aping the behaviors which were once overwhelmingly representative of us, is little more than a Cargo Cult mentality. I hope Beck soon gets over it.

Current Tea Party efforts (which I am a very small part of) can only at best establish temporary beachheads against the ongoing erosion of all we hold dear. I wish everyone who is concerned about America would think on this, grasp it and take it to heart: Unless America is reborn in the minds and hearts of the people through it's ideas, those ideas which are its roots and lifeblood... it will become just another country, with just another govt, and it will be one that is, temporarily, equipped with the greatest resources and military might in the world. This should not be a comforting thought for anyone.

Back to Anonymous, he goes on with,

"At the same time, America must bear the mantle of "father", NOT that of dominator."

(Must... resist... sharp tongue... reply...), (deep breath). American is not, cannot, and God willing, never will see itself as being 'father' to anyone. It is... distasteful... to think that other country's would view themselves as if children in relation to America. America stands as a beacon, nothing more. And if other nations manage to light one and hold it up as well, wonderful and welcome, the more the merrier. But don't dare attempt to hold us up as 'Father', you are not your children, and we will not care for you or coddle you, and to the extent that we may have unintentionally fostered that notion (assuming the defense of Europe), we should begin undoing that as soon as possible. I don't mean a Ron Paul sort of libertarian isolationism, but we do need to restore some balance and responsibility to the current status quo - which by the way is enabling the Euro-Socialist-Nanny State, and believe me, that is nothing but bad for us, for them, and for the world.

Anonymous continues,

"The reason that America is seen as a threat to world peace, is her current foriegn policy. That MUST change. People need to see America, as they did in times gone by...."

Personally, this 'impression' is of so little worth to me as to make mentioning it at all, an undeserved elevation. Our foreign policy should and must be directed towards protecting our valid interests and property, which as we stated in the Declaration of Independence at our first entrance upon the world stage,

• "... hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends."

If your country should choose to be a threat to America, it's people, or its peoples proper and rightful interests, directly - as is Iran today, or indirectly as Afghanistan or even Iraq did by befriending and/or supplying those who had destructive designs upon us, then if all is well with America, your country should be prepared to be dominated with extreme prejudice. Severely. Don't think Iraq or Afghanistan... America is not right in it's self at the moment. Think Pearl Harbor and Hiroshima. And Nagasaki, or at the very least, Normandy, Hamburg, Dresden, etc.

No apologies. None whatsoever. If you, through your govt should choose tyranny and violence, you should receive the most un-moderate, un-measured, un-proportionate response available and swift destruction as a result.

The reason the 'world' sees America as a threat to peace, is because

1. They've grown dependent and reliant upon America to defend them, and
2. They want to appear kind hearted and swell and oh so sympathetic to the rest of each other and the world, all the while knowing that they can do so only because they don't have to (and can't) defend themselves, and that the hand they're biting, will continue to protect them.

If it were up to me, I'd remove that protection from them, if unappreciated and unwanted, pronto.

"Gen. Eisenhaur warned us(on TV) about the hazards of the future. I saw it, and was listening. Were you?"

I've read it. I assume you mean 'military industrial complex'? With all due respect to Ike (and that is a very great amount due indeed), his focus was blurred at best. The 'military/Industrial complex' is only an optical illusion, the actual threat is that of a Political/Corporate complex, which was the original, and still, Ideal of Progressivism, and I would think it would be obvious that because "Money, and the hope of riches, make men crazy", the notion of giving politicians both the opportunity and the means to affect business (and to draw inducements, curry favors, bestow rewards and punishments) through regulations - which whatever the leftist boilerplate spin says, never were intentioned to 'save the little guy' but to consolidate business, and/or labor, under the direction of 'experts' and under the control of government. That is what it was intended to do (read what the likes of Teddy Roosevelt, Herbert Croly and Woodrow Wilson actually said on the subject, Are you aware that FDR's 'Minimum Wage laws' were pushed through NOT for the benefit of the working man, but explicitly as a measure to protect Unions and to keep both youth and minorities out of the workforce. It worked), and that is what they have done, whether it be the EEOC or the SEC, look for who has benefited from them, follow the money and the power to affect the money, there you'll find who these agencies were erected to benefit - hint: it wasn't the productive Rich, or the honest worker. Add to that power the ability to direct the military, and you've got the seeds of impending disaster.

Far from your misplaced concerns being a result of any issue having to do with a free market capitalism, they are a direct result of progressive (and/or whichever variant of anti-property rights mentality you want to pick) measures.

It was precisely Eisenhower's 'measured' responses to Arab nationalists 'nationalizing' western oil companies property, which ensured that islamo-fascism would rise as it has to threaten the west today (I am though speaking of the direct issue in and of itself, Eisenhower may very well have had direct and valid concerns and needs to maneuver against or around the USSR which I am unaware of, and which were not published, and if so then it may have been a valid case of a Very Bad choice being chosen over an even Worse one).

"Money, and the hope of riches, make men crazy. There are people who play on that maxim, and use it to thier benifit."

Yes, again, that is true. And so the recommendation leftists put forward to lessen the abuse of power, not economic power (which in a free market rests upon individuals choices), but the abuse of actual power (resting upon the threat of physical Force - govt), is to give men who sought, seek and currently exercise Power, more, and more ability to direct (force) the actions (choices being discarded by their mandates) which people may or must be directed to make?

Your serious solution to lessening the abuse of power and drive for riches, is to give politicians the unrestrained ability via laws and regulations to control businesses, and to mandate the 'choices' which the people may or must make? That makes sense to you?

Seriously?

"Herr Gobblels invented the use of radio, and multi-media, to further the will of state. Today it is a science. He would burst with pride!"

If I take the obvious implied meaning of that correctly, if you were within reach, your face would be considerably wetter.

"It all comes down to responsability. Each, and every one of us is responsible for the health of the nation. YOU, ME, EVERY SINGLE NORTH AMERICAN!"

Canada and Mexico and Central America are responsible for themselves. Period. Should any of you become a threat to us, I'd sadly and fully support your being held responsible for that. And I would assume vice versa. Americans seek no 'union' with any of you, and because you show no respect for, or ability to apply, the ideas our Nation is founded upon, you wouldn't deserve anything of the sort if for some reason we were open to it. Neighbors are fine as neighbors, attempt to move into my house, or tell me what to set my thermostat at, and you become a pest at best, a trespasser at worst, and subject to experiencing the benefit of our 2nd Amendment rights.

"The reverse side of the coin of freedom is responsibility!!! If the nation ails.....WE are responsible! "

Individuals are responsible, nations, however, are powers, powers which can and should be expected to be responsible only for the lawful exercise of their power to uphold the rights of their people. There can be no 'responsibility' of a nation to violate the rights of it's own citizens. As Madison said regarding a proposed bill in congress to appropriate funds for the relief of refugees from what is now Haiti,

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."

We, individually, on our own, are free to extend our aid and efforts to people in need, as we continually do from our own pockets whenever there is disaster around the world or here at home, and as we continue to do even now, with all the damage the govt has done to our private charities, and to each other. But the government has no right or business doing so itself.

Socialism, or any other 'ism which rests upon the dilution and negation of Property Rights, I repeat, no matter what your 'kind and heartfelt wishes', IS Evil, and I mean that in the deepest, darkest, most secular sense of the word (other senses are free to be applied as well).

"If every single human being, in North America desires freedom........IT IS THIER, INDIVIDUAL, RESPONSIBILITY TO SEE IT SURVIVE!"

Yes, if you desire to see freedom survive, then it is your responsibility to work to abolish your governments ability to abuse the rights of its citizens, it is your responsibility to try to turn your form of government into one more like America's original form of government. I am doing the same, to the best of my ability, here.

"If America collapses? Then ALL of us bear the responsability......equally."

If America collapses, then believe me - you're all hosed.

"It is incumbant on ALL of us who see, and recognize the present danger, to do our part to make it known to everybody. And to do whatever is needed to see that accomplished. "

Yep, as I said, it is your responsibility to work to abolish your governments ability to abuse the rights of its citizens, it is your responsibility to try to turn your form of government into one more like America's original ideals, glad to see you are finally getting behind liberty and the free market.

But of course, if that's not what you meant, then drop the swell sounding platitudes, and state clearly what you mean and intend. There is NO responsibility to be found from using the power derived from your fellow men to force your fellow man to be your keeper. There is no safety in undermining the source of prosperity and power, individual rights (which rest wholly and completely upon property rights), and the rule of constitutionally restrained law which protects them.

I won't dance around the point with niceties, although you may be well intentioned, what you propose is flat out evil - forcibly preventing a person from choosing their own actions in pursuit of their own life, plainly stated, the result of your good intentions can only be to replace the actions of the living soul of each person - their choices - with your own, you remove them from their own life.

Pure, unadulterated, Evil.

If unchecked, if will wreak destruction upon us all such as you cannot conceive. And for those, hopefully few, who are supporting these measures and actually understands what their notions truly mean to the free exercise of their and their fellow man's rights, yet advocate them anyway, they do, deeply, disgust me.