I'm From the Government, I'm Here to Help (Unapologetic Vanity)

All we need is to stop Amnesty; I'm from the government, I'm here to help.
All we need is the Gold Standard; I'm from the government, I'm here to help.
All we need is the Fair Tax; I'm from the government, I'm here to help.
All we need is another Reagan; I'm from the government, I'm here to help.

I know this article will upset, well, everyone. There are a lot who are upset that McCain is the end of the Conservative movement, or at least, he is setting the movement back to a Gerald Ford era. In this race, it seems everyone is emotionally tied to one candidate or another and will swear to their grave that their candidate was the only one that stood for true Constitutional Conservative values. We all seem to act as though Conservatives must rely on what the government will do for us to advance the movement.

What was the real power of the Reagan Revolution? Ronald Reagan said it perfectly: The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help. Why do we, as Conservatives, look to whose elected to 'help' the Conservative movement? The Reagan Revolution wasn't about the government making our country more Conservative, it was about the power of the individual despite the government. The Reagan Revolution told us that it doesn't matter what happens in Washington, we as Conservatives are in control of our own lives, or own choices, and our own destiny. The Reagan Revolution reminded us of that.

Oh how far we've fallen. The liberalization of the Republican party has not just resulted in more liberal policies by our leaders, but worse, it has resulted in many of us taking on the emotions and attitudes of the left. Instead of being strong, self reliant individuals, we now act as though we are the victim of our circumstances. We are the victim of illegal immigrants. We are the victim of neoCons. We are the victim of isolationists. We are the victim of trade agreements. We are a victim of monetary policy. We are the victim of fill in the blank.

Did Reagan teach us to be a victim? When Reagan took office liberal Democrats ran everything, there were very few Conservative Republicans, the economy was in the toilet, we faced an enemy who had rolled across Eastern Europe and much of Asia and had an arsenal of weapons pointed at us that could destroy us ten times over. Everything was stacked against us.

Did Reagan come in saying, you are a victim of your circumstances, but don't worry, I'm from the government, I'm here to help? No. Reagan told us: There are no constraints on the human mind, no walls around the human spirit, no barriers to our progress except those we ourselves erect.

Like it or not, we will have a moderate or liberal as our next President. The choice is ours, and ours alone if we will be the victim of that circumstance or if we will be the master of our own destiny.

I will close by warning you, next time a politician says: I'm from the government, I'm here to help, ask yourself if you really want his or her help or if you control your own destiny.

Then you aren't a victim, you are in control of your circumstances. Sure, you have to change what you do, but change will happen. When you start trying to have the government regulate change, you are in real trouble. If you think changing monetary policy will stop this change, be it inflation, devaluation, whatever, you are in trouble. Up until 1971, we allowed foreign banks the option of cashing currency in on gold. Even with just foreign banks working off the gold standard as a value basis for our dollar, it had inflated the cost so much and the demand increased so much, Nixon was forced to either take a loan against international gold supplies from foreign banks or take us completely off the gold standard (he chose the latter.) Thinking changing the monetary policy back to the gold standard (or any other standard) is the solution is a myth, it only continues the process of the government continuing to manipulate currency to try to stop change. (with gold it is far more volatile because it is a fixed asset currency that is much more prone to the whims of supply and demand.)

The real solution isn't changing monetary policy, it is for the government to stop the micromanagement in the first place. Yes, you will have inflation, you will also at times have deflation.

I think what a lot of people don't understand with Paul's proposal of moving to Austrian Economic Theory is that inflation, deflation, recessions, depressions are not eliminated, on the contrary, Austrian Economic Theory states very plainly that these changes naturally occur often because of the simple nature of supply and demand. (Keizer, Willem (1997). Austrian Economics in Debate.) It is a direct part of the Mises-Hayek business cycle theory.

It is not the solution people think it is, it is just the government continuing to play with the currency.

But to get back to the point, even this debate is moving us right back to the problem- is the government there to really fix our problems? Every generation believes exactly like you, that things are getting worse. Yet looking back, every generation has improved upon the last.

Well - we agree that the government should stay out of the way.

Austrian economics does recognize the business cycle and inflation due to supply/demand, but does not encourage the creation of more money at a whim like our current system does. I don’t think it micromanages anything in its pure form.

As for evey generation being better off than the one before it - depends on how you look at it. And - (if it’s true) it can’t last forever. Many signs are pointing towards this being the time when things stall (or worse.) We’ve been able to materially live better than prior generations because we’ve borrowed to do it. If you can’t afford what you’ve borrowed you’re not really any better off - and you may be worse off if you get yourself in too deep. Maybe we (not you or I of course) are just dumber than previous generations in thinking that we are better off.

Welcome back. Being a Christian libertarian, I agree with your post 100%, except for the use of “fri- ckin”. :-) I’m in PA also, and I still plan on voting for Ron. I have followed Ron’s career for decades and have more respect for him than any living politician. I don’t believe the idea of freedom is popular in this nation anymore; most people just want security... financial, military, social. I don’t know what it takes to change that.

Alas, a slight bit of color in my language I don’t seem to be able to remove. Consider it spice. :-)

What will it take? Like I keep telling everyone here, I think President Obama will be a big step. And that’s for both sides. The right will (hopefully) realize that their obsession at supporting their holy war at all costs was not worth electing the most socialist major party candidate in US history. The left will (hopefully) see that he’s not the anti-war candidate they dreamed of, nor is he any less a puppet of big business. And people like me will remind them (on both sides) to their dying day of the opportunity they missed because they were so obsessed with their partisan worldview that they forced themselves to believe disgusting slanders about one of the most honest, principled individuals to ever run for the oval office.

America is hanging by a fraying thread anyway, so by then it will be far too late to solve it through electoral means. But hopefully the civics lesson will take hold enough to be part of the solution for whatever post-America future awaits us.

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.