Since everyone is doing lists over the New Year, I thought I would too.
My basic idea is that we are experiencing a changing of the guard, culturally and politically, because our Educated Gentry has spent the last century doing stupid things.
Legislation by Supreme Court. The way I see it, courts are great for cleaning up messes, in particular in the commercial world. Oh, and inheritances! That's why the merchant/commercial world developed the idea of resolving their disputes with judges. Then the nation state took over the courts, because of the reputation for probity, and the chance to use the law in its power projects.
But of course, politicians ruin everything. Now, in my view the point of elections and legislation is to demonstrate a social and political consensus, to tell people where the power lies today. You wanna change it? Then start persuading more people and have an election. Thus, for the Educated Gentry to use the courts to advance their class agenda is not a good idea, because it doesn't have to persuade people, just persuade the elite.
First, it's unjust. Second, it doesn't resolve anything. Third, it means you have to keep your hammerlock on the courts for ever and ever, amen. Thus, the Supreme Court decision on abortion, Roe v. Wade. Thus the Supreme Court decision of homosexual marriage, Obergefell v. Hodges. Thus the Supreme Court decisions on Affirmative Action. The problem is that when you legislate by Supreme Court ukase you have not won the people to your side. You have just created an injustice. And then you have to fight to the death to keep the Supreme Court reliably Gentry by "borking" the wrong kind of candidates.
Justice by Politics. The purpose of morality is to maintain a consensus about what human behavior is antisocial, and thus deplored by all good people. The purpose of politics is to protect the people from enemies foreign and domestic. In other words, politics is about life and death issues that threaten a human society; and morality is about the less critical stuff.
Back in the day, through the genius of the separation of church and state, our forefathers rather neatly separated these two zones of human social collision. Problem is that, since the Death of God to the more progressive Gentry, moral issues have tended to become questions of politics. The less violent methods of social control practiced by the community of women, such as naming, shaming, and shunning, have been shut down in favor of the methods used by men, the police power of incarceration and execution.
The reason I say that there is no such thing as justice, only injustice, is that I believe that the modern habit of "legislating morality" is in fact almost always the legislation of injustice.
Government Pensions. I think that the only government pensions I approve of are for veterans of the armed forces. Especially veterans wounded in the nation's wars. Otherwise government pensions degenerate into pure loot and plunder. And the injustice of government pensions is that the old'uns like me outvote the young'uns and tax away their youth -- when they are marrying and having children -- to keeep the old'uns in clover. If we had a private pension system -- even if it featured compulsory saving -- then people would retire when they had acquired enough savings to create jobs for the young'uns that could support the old'uns.
Government Healthcare. Let's say that it is a Good Thing to make sure that old people and poor people have access to healthcare. Maybe it is also a Good Thing to force healthy people of working age to get health insurance. But provision for the poor and the aged doesn't need to be a government program. It could be provided by billionaires, by mutual-aid societies, by churches, by charities. And the problem with government healthcare is that you can't reform it, not without bribing tons of people. Put it this way: suppose Walmart was a government program. Do you think it would ever have come close to providing an abundance cheap stuff for Commoners and Clients?
Government Education. Let's say that it is a Good Thing for children to become literate and numerate. Then how would we do it, today? Would we really create a universal government program of child incarceration in government child-custodial facilities? Would we really ban all child labor? What really is the purpose of child education? We could say that, back in the day, it was a Good Thing to make the children of illiterates literate. But won't the literate mothers of children automatically make their children literate? And should we render up children unto Caesar so he can teach them regime ideology? I tell you what I think. I think that the neighborhood women should get together to teach the kiddies. And any women that didn't get with the program would be named and shamed and shunned.
Government-sponsored Racism. All societies all down the ages have been "racist" in that they have defined themselves by some real and/or imagined identity: of the kindred, the tribe, the principality, the nation. But obviously identity politics is a very sharp-edged weapon. You can whip up national identity into an agenda for world conquest. Or you can use differences in race and origin to divide people in a nation. And really, once a political entity goes beyond forbidding the government to discriminate on the basis of whatever, you are trafficing in racism. And Anti-racism is just as racist as Racism straight up. In other words, if you are using government to fight racism, you are spotlighting racial and identity differences, making people "notice."
Crisis Mongering. The only warrant for government power is existential peril. Thus, every ruling class is on the hunt for some peril, real or imagined, that gives it the warrant to take the nation to war and draft the young generation into the rank and file of the army. In our day these crises usually involve some kind of victim that "we" must save. Or it is the planet that we must save. The problem with all such noble efforts is the casualty list. Of course, in a real shooting war the casualties these days are likely to mount into the millions. But seemingly innocent efforts have their casualties: the childless cat-ladies of the feminist revolution; the fatherless black men of the civil-rights revolution; the underclass of the welfare state where the men don't work much and the women don't marry much; the folks that lost their jobs in the Great Recession so that deadbeats could own homes. And Lord knows what the butcher's bill of the fight against climate change will look like.
Jobs for Gentry. I understand the whole administrative state as one giant Jobs for Gentry program. See, life is uncertain. How does a scion of the Gentry get that good job doing something meaningful? I look at all the Deep Staters in the Get Trump game and I think: Jobs for Gentry. I look at all the Studies professors and I think: Jobs for Gentry. I look at the deep and wide world of activism and NGOs and think: Jobs for Gentry. Yeah! Whatabout the Commoners?
OK, that's only Eight. But I'll have more later, see if I don't!
My basic idea is that we are experiencing a changing of the guard, culturally and politically, because our Educated Gentry has spent the last century doing stupid things.
Legislation by Supreme Court. The way I see it, courts are great for cleaning up messes, in particular in the commercial world. Oh, and inheritances! That's why the merchant/commercial world developed the idea of resolving their disputes with judges. Then the nation state took over the courts, because of the reputation for probity, and the chance to use the law in its power projects.
But of course, politicians ruin everything. Now, in my view the point of elections and legislation is to demonstrate a social and political consensus, to tell people where the power lies today. You wanna change it? Then start persuading more people and have an election. Thus, for the Educated Gentry to use the courts to advance their class agenda is not a good idea, because it doesn't have to persuade people, just persuade the elite.
First, it's unjust. Second, it doesn't resolve anything. Third, it means you have to keep your hammerlock on the courts for ever and ever, amen. Thus, the Supreme Court decision on abortion, Roe v. Wade. Thus the Supreme Court decision of homosexual marriage, Obergefell v. Hodges. Thus the Supreme Court decisions on Affirmative Action. The problem is that when you legislate by Supreme Court ukase you have not won the people to your side. You have just created an injustice. And then you have to fight to the death to keep the Supreme Court reliably Gentry by "borking" the wrong kind of candidates.
Justice by Politics. The purpose of morality is to maintain a consensus about what human behavior is antisocial, and thus deplored by all good people. The purpose of politics is to protect the people from enemies foreign and domestic. In other words, politics is about life and death issues that threaten a human society; and morality is about the less critical stuff.
Back in the day, through the genius of the separation of church and state, our forefathers rather neatly separated these two zones of human social collision. Problem is that, since the Death of God to the more progressive Gentry, moral issues have tended to become questions of politics. The less violent methods of social control practiced by the community of women, such as naming, shaming, and shunning, have been shut down in favor of the methods used by men, the police power of incarceration and execution.
The reason I say that there is no such thing as justice, only injustice, is that I believe that the modern habit of "legislating morality" is in fact almost always the legislation of injustice.
Government Pensions. I think that the only government pensions I approve of are for veterans of the armed forces. Especially veterans wounded in the nation's wars. Otherwise government pensions degenerate into pure loot and plunder. And the injustice of government pensions is that the old'uns like me outvote the young'uns and tax away their youth -- when they are marrying and having children -- to keeep the old'uns in clover. If we had a private pension system -- even if it featured compulsory saving -- then people would retire when they had acquired enough savings to create jobs for the young'uns that could support the old'uns.
Government Healthcare. Let's say that it is a Good Thing to make sure that old people and poor people have access to healthcare. Maybe it is also a Good Thing to force healthy people of working age to get health insurance. But provision for the poor and the aged doesn't need to be a government program. It could be provided by billionaires, by mutual-aid societies, by churches, by charities. And the problem with government healthcare is that you can't reform it, not without bribing tons of people. Put it this way: suppose Walmart was a government program. Do you think it would ever have come close to providing an abundance cheap stuff for Commoners and Clients?
Government Education. Let's say that it is a Good Thing for children to become literate and numerate. Then how would we do it, today? Would we really create a universal government program of child incarceration in government child-custodial facilities? Would we really ban all child labor? What really is the purpose of child education? We could say that, back in the day, it was a Good Thing to make the children of illiterates literate. But won't the literate mothers of children automatically make their children literate? And should we render up children unto Caesar so he can teach them regime ideology? I tell you what I think. I think that the neighborhood women should get together to teach the kiddies. And any women that didn't get with the program would be named and shamed and shunned.
Government-sponsored Racism. All societies all down the ages have been "racist" in that they have defined themselves by some real and/or imagined identity: of the kindred, the tribe, the principality, the nation. But obviously identity politics is a very sharp-edged weapon. You can whip up national identity into an agenda for world conquest. Or you can use differences in race and origin to divide people in a nation. And really, once a political entity goes beyond forbidding the government to discriminate on the basis of whatever, you are trafficing in racism. And Anti-racism is just as racist as Racism straight up. In other words, if you are using government to fight racism, you are spotlighting racial and identity differences, making people "notice."
Crisis Mongering. The only warrant for government power is existential peril. Thus, every ruling class is on the hunt for some peril, real or imagined, that gives it the warrant to take the nation to war and draft the young generation into the rank and file of the army. In our day these crises usually involve some kind of victim that "we" must save. Or it is the planet that we must save. The problem with all such noble efforts is the casualty list. Of course, in a real shooting war the casualties these days are likely to mount into the millions. But seemingly innocent efforts have their casualties: the childless cat-ladies of the feminist revolution; the fatherless black men of the civil-rights revolution; the underclass of the welfare state where the men don't work much and the women don't marry much; the folks that lost their jobs in the Great Recession so that deadbeats could own homes. And Lord knows what the butcher's bill of the fight against climate change will look like.
Jobs for Gentry. I understand the whole administrative state as one giant Jobs for Gentry program. See, life is uncertain. How does a scion of the Gentry get that good job doing something meaningful? I look at all the Deep Staters in the Get Trump game and I think: Jobs for Gentry. I look at all the Studies professors and I think: Jobs for Gentry. I look at the deep and wide world of activism and NGOs and think: Jobs for Gentry. Yeah! Whatabout the Commoners?
OK, that's only Eight. But I'll have more later, see if I don't!
No comments:
Post a Comment