Statists think they can use initiated force (in the form of laws, rules, and tax funding) to solve social problems. And when their solutions fail they blame the opposing party or some other non-cooperating force. This means they’ve fallen for…
The Dictator Fallacy: The belief that any law or program will be implemented exactly as the designer intended, as if he or she were an all-powerful dictator, with control over everything.
- Your new regulation or initiative won’t be passed, administered or adjudicated by you (other politicians and interests will have their say too)
- Nor will everyone cooperate with your plan.
The notion that you can perfectly harness the awesome, violent power of initiated force, is simply a fallacy.
Related Mental Lever: Ideology
By Perry Willis & Jim Babka
So totally agree…a well programed robot might ..but who programs the robot..a catch 22.. 🙂
Lord of the Rings fans will appreciate the parallel. When plans were being made to destroy the ring of power, there were those who believed it could be used to defeat Sauron’s evil but it was, in fact, the very embodiment of that evil. The imposition of one’s will upon others through the use of force is exactly analogous.
We have a problem with all three of the candidates that will be on the ballot in all 50 states, then. We have Donald Trump, who has abused the eminent domain clause, Hillary Clinton, who has abused her power on numerous occasions and is being treated as ‘more equal’ than others who have committed similar crimes, and Gary Johnson, who has stated his support for government-mandated service to gay patrons by private business, (no more reserving the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason) and has other issues. We are in a catch 22 this election, at least in states where one only has those three options.
Yes, Penni B, we are and have been in a damned if we do and damned if we don’t predicament from before Lincoln. We don’t need any more crooked, commie/socialist politicians; we need about 80% less government. Like all empires, Amerika will be destroyed. The 210 trillions in unfunded liabilities that were imposed on future generations is the crime of the millennium and it was the result of politicians imposing the fiat currency system, The Fed, back in 1913. We are well past the norm for failure of such criminal currency systems.
I might up the ante to 90% less government, if we included government at all levels. It’s not just limited to the legislative branch either, as both of the other two branches of government regularly overstep their bounds. (All you have to do is look at a few recent cases to see how the Supreme Court does:
There has been abuse by the Executive branch since possibly Shay’s rebellion, and certainly since Lincoln. So for the ‘good’ of no race -based slavery (when the real goal was ‘preserving the union’ at all costs!), we had a president who could violate the habeus corpus principle, start a capitation tax for war, limit severely the freedom of the press, and deny the right to speedy trial by jury. In the end, the ‘ true colors’ of the Lincoln administration were shown by the Emancipation Proclamation, which ‘freed’ the slaves in the South but let states still in the Union maintain bound slaves. Statists prove themselves to be hypocrites sooner or later, with a ‘the law applies to you, but not to me’ bent.
Too much government is never a good thing you see thouse in government make the decision not to become a representative government. Why should they? they have all power and might makes right after all