Posted on 03/14/2021 10:42:29 AM PDT by GraceG
Why is there always such a push towards "federal programs to solve local problems"?
Many of the Federal programs that are touted to solve programs affecting individuals should be on the state level or local level and not the federal level.
The money is more "accountable" that way.
The big lie about small L "libertarian" is that they're only for anarchy govt, when in actuality they are more for "Distributed Government"
Why is this?
That is because a lot of localities are no longer vested in local control of their own government as there is a constant human nature to "appeal to a higher power" in order to shirk local responsibility to force a higher level on the hierarchy to "solve their problems"
This slowly devolves any form of government that has power distributed through it eventually to a more centralized control model where local politicians are just powerless bureaucrats and all real power is shifted to a group of national level un-vested un-elected bureaucrats.
The more this happens the faster it accelerates until all the centralized power is a bloated, unaware, and very inefficient.
Suddenly more money is needed for only marginal results and the machine must feed on more and more of the citizen's productivity.
Those initial problems that would like they would be easily solved by a small amount of money and time soon become eternal institutions that must be staffed with lots of paperwork to be shuffled daily.
It's not long before these institutions look for more "problems" to "solve".
The more problems the more job security there is to be had, the more incentive to expand their mission statement while the original problem is only dealt with around the edges, only making enough progress to justify existence and most importantly justify asking for more resources.
It's not purely a Democrat/Republican problem it is a human problem & what happens when any amount of power distributed, it will work for a generation or two, then it will slowly then quickly begin to stack up on the highest tier of the established hierarchy.
Why is man in his nature prone to such behavior?
When man was living in small tribes they would appeal to village elder to solve problems they could not solve themselves.
When the village elder could not solve those problems they would appeal to the "spirits" of nature ( A higher authority ).
Because humans are tribal there is an instinct to appeal to the alpha male for guidance/solutions.
This pattern repeats all through history, let's take a look at our own government's history:
When this country was founded, most affairs that directly affected a person where handled locally. People knew who their local administrators were and would always be able to engage them concerning problems that were directly affecting them. There was no sense of helplessness as they could appeal directly to the town magistrate, county administrator, state representative and any issues usually stopped with the State's Governor if they ever even got that far.etc...
Today, a very disappointing fact is that most people could not even tell you who their city council members are but they can tell you who their Federal Senator or President is and those are the people who actually pay attention to the news! When it comes to spending money, local issues are always included in spending bills passed by federal congress.
Let's take a look at the role of the president through history:
Originally the president's role was seen more as an "chief ambassador" to the rest of the world.
Today his role is seen more as "Chief Administrator" and executive orders are always whipped out to deal with local catastrophes or other issues that were never meant to be dealt with by the office.
It is the federal government's own interest to wrest more power from local, and people deep down feel this and after a while they feel "Why bother if it is going to be overruled federally anyways?"
So as the local power is reduced, local apathy grows to match and the whole trend accelerates. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised at some point if there isn;t a movement to dissolve the states and local municipalities and place them under the direct control of some centralized authority.... for the "sake of the people" who have been so demoralized and apathetic that their only appeal is to the "spirits" of rulers so far above them, they are literally a mythical entity.
As so many people have fallen away from the Church, the Government becomes the Higher Power in their lives.
Why is there always such a push towards “federal programs to solve local problems”?
When I challenge them that all laws enslave, their response is, “But our laws are better.”
I would also propose that before Trump, (and I love him dearly for what he has done) there was a strong movement of states rights.
This is where we need to fight the battle. Forget the national news, focus on state news. Along with state, get involved in local affairs. Read local news.
Maybe even start a new state/local newspaper. I would invest in one, not for profit but for the future.
Keep you eye on the ball.
The federal government can be billions or trillions in debt. States have to balance their budgets. Maybe time will catch up with the federal debt and cause us a world of pain, and states can find ways to fake a balanced budget, but there's still a big difference between the state and federal governments fiscally. Washington is where the money goes and state governments are grateful if they can get some of it back without imposing new taxes or debt on their citizens.
People who go to Washington really want to run things. They crave power. People who go to Boise or Olympia or Salem are more modest and contented to let the federal government do the big jobs if they can only have a piece of the pie themselves. State legislators and officials don't want the kind of responsibilities that advocates of limited federal government would like the states to assume. If they do want that power, they go to Washington to get it.
Because leftists get in the federal government to push for it.
Why is there always such a push towards “federal programs to solve local problems”?
The New Deal, Dean Acheson wrote approvingly in a book called A Democrat Looks At His Party, “conceived of the federal government as the whole people organized to do what had to be done.” A year later, Mr. (Arthur) Larson wrote A Republican Looks At His Party, and made much the same claim in his book for modern Republicans. The “underlying philosophy” of the New Republicanism, said Mr. Larson, is that “if a job has to be done to meet the needs of the people, and no one else can do it, then it is the proper function of the federal government.”The rest of the blueprint is in The Principles of Communism, The Communist Manifesto and other screeds in this vein.
Here we have, by prominent spokesmen of both political parties, an unqualified repudiation of the principle of limited government. There is no reference by either of them to the Constitution, or any attempt to define the legitimate functions of government. The government can do whatever needs to be done; note, too, the implicit but necessary assumption that it is the government itself that determines what needs to be done. We must not, I think, underrate the importance of these statements. They reflect the view of a majority of the leaders of one of our parties, and of a strong minority among the leaders of the other, and they propound the first principle of totalitarianism: that the State is competent to do all things and is limited in what it actually does only by the will of those who control the State. …
— The Conscience of a Conservative (1960), Chapter 2, page 15
“Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.”— Communist goal #15
Which “conservatives” do you mean? The ones on this website are for far fewer laws, and for proper enforcement of the fewer laws in question. Nobody that I’ve seen on here is calling for counter-legislation to the heaps of unconstitutional leftist legislation.
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.
It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies.
The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
By C.S. Lewis
This is getting interesting but you’re giving these morons in the district of criminals way too much credit and intelligence
The Democratic Party is a criminal enterprise which serves one purpose and that is 1- to loot the treasury
What is the first thing that the Democrats passed by reconciliation with no Republican votes as soon as they seized power through complete corruption and fraud in 2020?
A $1.9 billion bail out for all of their friends and cronies and corrupt governments in blue states
They threw in 1400 bucks a person for the year average Joe out here just to make them think they give a crap about us too
My question for my Democrat friends is always the same
Naim why just one Democrat one who’s ever had a real job of been a leader of any industry?
Name one Democrat who’s ever been a doctor
You can’t
Now of course they’re all 100% of them , lawyers
What else do you need to know
So you can look at my new tagline ;
but if we do not get our voting system back and be able to elect the officials who we choose , America is lost
For now until the 2020 election is completely exposed and undone: I am done with politics and voting
I think there’s a very good percentage of the 80 million or so voted for our wonderful and great President , Donald J Trump , that are with me on that point
Unless the link weenie spine and Republicans learn how to be men and fight these trucks creates communists and insane lunatics otherwise known as Democrats ; this country doesn’t have any leader ship
Now in my life I try to talk to all my liberal Democrat friends and it’s kind of like talking to a brick wall ; these people are that stupid
What is the answer? I don’t know
Which “conservatives” do you mean? The ones on this website are for far fewer laws, and for proper enforcement of the fewer laws in question. Nobody that I’ve seen on here is calling for counter-legislation to the heaps of unconstitutional leftist legislation.
You need to listen closely, it is there. Most all solutions here are of a political nature, passing more national laws or electing the right politician. The government is the solution for almost every problem.
It is human nature to take the easiest path and pass another law in a centralized government. Every bit of legislation is another law to be used against us. What legislation doesn’t cause more problems than it solves? Name me one!
What is conservatism? Few know, or have their personal one issue definition.
https://kirkcenter.org/conservatism/ten-conservative-principles/
One of the principles of conservatism in understanding human nature.
Now having stated my case, what is the solution if not a centralized government?
The answer is, there is no solution, no magic bullet. We cannot pass laws against human nature.
The best we can do is move the power/corruption back to state/local. That should be our goal and the founding fathers knew this. The battle is never won and must be continually engaged.
...
With all due respect, I hear virtually nobody calling for passing more national laws on this forum, save the occasional RINO concern troll or outright leftist that sneaks on here. I do hear a lot of calls for the reassertion of state authority particularly when national law conflicts with state law and/or the US Constitution (and close to 100 percent of the time, it’s both).
As for electing the “right” politician to DC, yes there is a lot of that, and as the 2020 “election” showed, that has become a hopeless case requiring drastic (but not draconian) action to remedy. Thomas Jefferson’s letters to Spencer Roane immediately jump to mind.
[ it started the day the gathers told the hunters how the meat was going to be carved up and they let them get away with it... ]
No doubt
It’s not purely a Democrat/Republican problem...
**************
We should never vote for any Republican who won’t commit to demonstrating (through actions) a commitment and resolve to decrease the size of government. The GOP has long enabled the growth of big government and an obscene national debt.
You are correct but I believe our people are addicted to govt gravy and it will take a catastrophic event to change this.
Now having stated my case, what is the solution if not a centralized government?
*************
One positive step forward would be to elect people who will start eliminating the costly and inefficient redundancy of functions between agencies. Nearly every agency does things that duplicate things other agencies do. There is an enormous amount of wasteful overlap. This would be a good place to start — and then move on to cutting their budgets next. Force the agencies to shrink and get back to doing their core functions only.
Many of the Federal programs that are touted to solve programs affecting individuals should be on the state level or local level and not the federal level.
.................................................
Basically that is the Catholic doctrine of Subsidiarity. This tenet holds that nothing should be done by a larger and more complex organization which can be done as well by a smaller and simpler organization. In other words, any activity which can be performed by a more decentralized entity should be. This principle is a bulwark of limited government and personal freedom.
As so many people have fallen away from the Church, the Government becomes the Higher Power in their lives.
....................................................
And that falling away is directly attributable to the debacle known as the Second Vatican Council (also rightly referred to as the Satan Council).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.