One of my favorite quotes is supposed to have come from Senator Everett Dirksen (R-IL), although it is probably more likely a misquote or misattribution. “A billion here and a billion there and pretty soon you’re talking about real money.” For me, this speaks to a central issue with our government. The scale of the money we print and spend is inconceivable to the average American (including most of our politicians). We have reached a point where the questions “What is the right size?” and “What are the right costs?” for our government are no longer questions we consider, we only argue about how much of the promissory paper (i.e. money) we print should go to this or that government program. But, towards what end do we do this?
Why do we have a government at all? Why does anyone have one? Could the United Nations ever be a world government, and if so would that solve all our problems?
These and a hundred other questions rattle around in my mind, and while I may have some opinions so does everyone else. Some of those with opinions make a living out of espousing them in the hopes of influencing others to believe as they do. I live under no such illusion. I’ve come to believe we each must decide for ourselves the answers to every why question you can ask. There are some that are so big there can be no definitive answer we can prove or disprove with certainty, and your personal choice becomes the basis for other answers.
For example, how was the universe created? We have, on the one hand, a scientific theory that suggests it started with a “big bang” where everything originated from a single nothing. We have proved some of the supporting science to argue this is a fact, but not enough to say it is the only fact of origin. Then, of course, we have the theological explanation, God created the universe and its creation is beyond our understanding. Those who reject the idea of a God naturally aspire to the scientific explanation, even though their theory is filled with more questions than answers, they assume they will someday find all the answers, it is only a matter of time. But towards what end is a man a part of the universe, why do we exist? Although science has gone to great lengths to explain how man exists, it does not seem too concerned with answering the why.
So, why does our government exist? What purpose does it serve? Our forefathers believed a government so far removed from the people could not serve the needs of the people and fought a war of independence to establish a more responsive government. Their first attempt at government was a loose confederation of the 13 original states, with each state maintaining its own sovereignty[1]. After only a few years they found this form of government to be ineffective to the common good.
Their second attempt was and is what we have today, although I doubt the founders could have imagined the changes in power and control now exercised by the central government. Their purpose was clearly intended to address what they found as shortcomings of the confederation, and are laid out in the preamble.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Here we are entering 2018, and the question before us is a simple one. Do the various voices we hear yelling across the media still believe the government provides for the purposes intended by our founders, or would they abandon the framework for some other purpose? To what end does the left rave about the character of the President while glorifying their own politicians, at least until they become a burden and are cast aside to maintain the illusion of moral superiority?
From my point of view, the political debate is now driven exclusively by greed and the desire of the political parties, their politicians, and political activists to enrich themselves. The illusion that a politician enters into the job as a “service” is thoroughly debunked by a simple review of net worth when they start the job and when they end it. Of course, when someone comes into the job already wealthy the natural question is why? Those who know only personal gain as a politician, of course, are the first to condemn them for seeking more personal wealth.
No comments:
Post a Comment