 |
|
|
 |
Or, and here we stopped dead in our tracks when we thought of it, is it the modern realist, who sees neither the black of night nor the brightness of day, but only the gray of not caring one way or the other? A sane man knows the earth turns. He knows that in almost all things - stock markets, politics, nature - there is an observable tendency to revert to the mean. This causes him to temper his enthusiasms. Stocks at 200 times earnings may be attractive in the festive candlelight of evening; he reckons that they may be less fetching in the bright sun of the following day. If he is an optimist, he welcomes the opportunity to enjoy the night, knowing that he will enjoy the day too, if he leaves before breakfast. If he is a real pessimist, on the other hand, he regards the whole affair as a waste of time...turns gray and blows his brains out. Both French and Americans believe themselves exceptional. That they are different, we do not deny. Au contraire, we enjoy the differences daily. But that they are also very much the same is also true; neither can make the world stand still. "The role of the state," said Jean-Luc Lagardère, before he died recently, "has been fundamental since the 17th century [in France], something I greatly admire." "When we organized our state," adds Charles Pasqua, a former Gaullist minister, “we were bold enough to imagine that it was a model not only for France, but for the whole world." The French were so proud of their 'civilization,' they offered it to the rest of the world. Unbelievably, taking the 'mission civilisatrice' to its African colonies, the children of dark tribes learned about 'our ancestors, the Gauls.' The centralized welfare state took a big leap forward in France in the 1930s under Léon Blum...and in America under Franklin Roosevelt in the same period. And now, a
kind of heady, vainglorious, feeblemindedness has taken hold in Washington.
Led by the neo-cons, Americans see themselves as gods...as masters of the
universe who intend to remake the world in their own image.
"Dying for one's country doesn't come naturally," says he, perhaps cribbing from Osama bin Laden. "Modern armies, raised from the populace, must be inspired, motivated, indoctrinated. Religion is central to the military enterprise, for men are more likely to risk their lives is they believe they will be rewarded forever after for serving their country." Communism collapsed in Russia. But it was hardly a victory for American liberty. No social welfare programs were cancelled in the U.S. or Western Europe. Instead, they expanded...and now the nation rushes towards its own rendezvous with the Spectacular Socialist State...following in the footsteps of the French! "The so-called conservative revolution of the past two decades," writes our favorite member of Congress, Ron Paul of Texas, "has given us massive growth in government size, spending and regulation. Deficits are exploding and the national debt is now rising at greater than half-trillion dollars per year. Taxes do not go down - even if we vote to lower them. They can't, as long as spending is increased, since all spending must be paid for one way or another...believers in limited government are now shunned or laughed at...Government is bigger than ever, and future commitments are overwhelming...The country is broke, but no one in Washington seems to notice or care." Oooh...how the world turns. When the sane man looks ahead, his face turns gray as he sees the spectacular state making a super spectacle of itself. Already, an
American feels freer, which is to say more American, in Paris, France than
in Paris, Texas. He can smoke where he wants to. He can drive faster. He
can wear a green sarong and bathroom slippers down main street without
anyone hassling him (though perhaps he can do that in Paris, Texas, too
- we don't know anyone who has tried!)
A man might be pessimistic about all this. Or he might not. Harder times are coming. But better ones too. Bill Bonner P.S. “The modern-day, limited-government movement has been co-opted,” says Ron Paul. “The conservatives have failed in their effort to shrink the size of government. There has not been, nor will there soon be, a conservative revolution in Washington. Political party control of the federal government has changed, but the inexorable growth in the size and scope of government has continued unabated. The liberal arguments for limited government in personal affairs and foreign military adventurism were never seriously considered as part of this revolution. “Since the change of the political party in charge has not made a difference, who's really in charge? “If the particular party in power makes little difference, whose policy is it that permits expanded government programs, increased spending, huge deficits, nation building and the pervasive invasion of our privacy, with fewer Fourth Amendment protections than ever before?” Ron Paul’s speech before Congress last Wednesday is a must read... See: “Neo-conned”
|
