Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

YES MOMMY (A well Regulated State)
E-mail ^ | 9.12.02 | Fred Reed

Posted on 09/15/2002 9:15:23 AM PDT by Pistol

YES MOMMY

A Well-Regulated State  

    

We tell ourselves that in America we are the Free People. I wonder whether we might not better be called the Obedient People, the Passive People, or the Admonished People. I doubt that any country, anywhere, has been so regulated, controlled, and directed as we are. We are bred to obey. And obey we do.

It begins with the sheer volume of law, rules, and administrative duties. Most of the regulation makes sense in isolation, or can be made plausible. Yet there is so much of it.

Used to be if you wanted a dog, you got a dog. It wasn't really the government's business. Today you need a dog license, a shot card for the dog, a collar and tags, proof that the poor beast has been neutered, and you have to keep it on a leash and walk it only in designated places. It's all so we don't get rabies.

Or consider cars. You have to have a title, insurance, and keep it up to date; tags, country sticker, inspection sticker, emissions test. Depending where you are, you can't have chips in the windshield, and you need a zoned parking permit. You have to wear a seatbelt. And of course there are unending traffic laws. You can get a ticket for virtually anything, usually without knowing that you were doing anything wrong.

Then there's paperwork. If you have a couple of daughters with college funds in the stock market, annually you have to fill out three sets of federal taxes, three sets of state, and file four state and four federal estimated tax forms, per person, for a total of twenty-four. This doesn't include personal property taxes for the country, business licenses, tangible business-assets forms, and so on.

Now, I'm not suggesting that all these laws are bad. Stupid, frequently, but evil, no. Stopping at traffic lights is probably a good idea, and certainly is if I'm crossing the street. But the laws never end. Bring a doughnut on the subway, and you get arrested. Don't replace your windows without permission in writing from the condo association. Nothing is too trivial to be regulated. Nothing is not some government's business.

I wonder whether the habit of constant obedience to infinitely numerous rules doesn't inculcate a tendency to obey any rule at all. By having every aspect of one's life regulated in detail, does one not become accustomed to detailed regulation? That is, detailed obedience?

For many it may be hard to remember freer times. Yet they existed. In 1964, when I graduated from high school in rural Virginia, there were speed limits, but nobody much enforced them, or much obeyed them. If you wanted to fish, you needed a pole, not a license. You fished where you wanted, not in designated fishing zones. If you wanted to carry your rifle to the bean field to shoot whistle pigs, you just did it. You didn't need a license and nobody got upset.

To buy a shotgun in the country store, you needed money, not a background check, waiting period, proof of age, certificate of training, and a registration form. If your tail light burned out, then you only had one tail light. If you wanted to park on a back road with your girl friend, the cops, all both of them, didn't care. If you wanted to swim in the creek, you didn't need a Coast Guard approved life jacket.

It felt different. You lived in the world as you found it, and behaved because you were supposed to, but you didn't feel as though you were in a white-collar prison. And if anybody had asked us, we would have said that the freedom was worth more to us than any slightly greater protection against rabies, thank you. Which nobody ever got anyway.

Today, the Mommy State never leaves off protecting us from things I'd just as soon not be protected from. We must wear a helmet on a motorcycle: Kevorkian can kill us, but we cannot kill ourselves. Why is it Mommy Government's business whether I wear a helmet? In fact I do wear one, but it should be my decision.

And so it goes from administrative minutiae (emissions inspections) to gooberish Mommyknowsbestism ("Wea-a-ar your lifejacket, Johnny!") to important moral decisions. Obey in small things, obey in large things.

You must hire the correct proportion of this and that ethnic group, watch your sex balance, prove that you have the proper attitude toward homosexuals. You must let your children be politically indoctrinated in appropriate values, must let your daughter get an abortion without telling you, must accept affirmative action no matter how morally repugnant you find it.

And we do. We are the obedient people.

As the regulation of our behavior becomes more pervasive, so does the mechanism of enforcement grow more nearly omnipresent. In Washington, if you eat on the subway, they really will put you in handcuffs, as they recently did to a girl of twelve. In 1964 in King George County, the cop would have said, "Sally, stop that." Arresting a child for sucking on a sourball would never have entered a state trooper's mind.

Which brings us to an ominous observation. America is absolutely capable of totalitarianism. It won't be the jackbooted variety, but rather a peculiarly mindless, bureaucratic insistence on conformity. What we call political correctness is an American approach to political control.

Our backdoor totalitarianism has the added charm of being crazy.

Think about it. Confiscating nail clippers at security gates, arresting the eating girl on the subway, the confiscation from an aging general of his Congressional Medal of Honor because it had points, the countless ejections from school of little boys for drawing soldiers of the Trade Centers in flames, playing cowboys and Indians, for pointing a chicken finger and saying Bang. This isn't intelligent authoritarianism aimed at purposeful if disagreeable ends. It is the behavior of petty and stupid people, of minor minds over-empowered, ignorant, but angry and charmed to find that they can push others around. It is the exercise of power by people who have no business having any.

And we obey.

We are the obedient people.

Buy Fred's new reprehensible book,Nekkid In Austin! Barnes and Noble has the sucker. Another collection of Fred's collected outrages, irresponsible ravings, and curmudgeonry from Fred On Everything and some innocent magazines that foolishly published him. Put Fred Reed in the search at thingy at B&N and the book will pop like mushrooms on a decaying stump. On request, they may ship it in a plain brown wrapper marked "Sex Books" so your neighbors won't suspect.


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: freedom; govt; laws; obedience
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 last
To: fporretto
It has no appeal to me. If Im going to live in a totalitarian state at least give me the cool uniforms LOL.
61 posted on 09/16/2002 5:13:11 AM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: weikel
The simple, cynical explanation is this: if you create a multitude of unenforceable (and largely unknown) laws, then virtually EVERYONE becomes a criminal, consciously or unconsciously. And, since enforcement is spotty at best (or worst) there is widespread, perhaps unintentional, non-compliance. Everyone, therefore, becomes a criminal, and it is up to the state to pick and choose which of its enemies it wishes to incarcerate.

It no longer becomes necessary for those in power to trump up charges against their political opponents, since the laws are already on the books. Because of this, the Constitutional protection against unreasonable search and seizure is the most important part of the Bill of Rights; it is the only thing standing between the average citizen and prison time. If, for example, the Polizei were permitted to just ransack your residence in search of nothing in particular, it is almost certain that they would find something that would justify legal action.

62 posted on 09/16/2002 6:53:34 AM PDT by Goetz_von_Berlichingen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Goetz_von_Berlichingen
Exactly. If your a fan of Terry Pratchett's discworld series Samuel Vimes the Ankh Morpork city watch commander( not that they do much Lord Vetinari is pretty libertarian except if you try to overthrow him and then he has this thing about mimes...) observes that it might be possible to go for a day without breaking any laws by remaining very still in a cellar somewhere...but even then you were probably loitering.
63 posted on 09/16/2002 6:58:15 AM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Goetz_von_Berlichingen
Which btw brings to mind another fault of Republics( actually this flaw would apply less to a pure mob rule Democracy). Since the legislatures job is making laws they tend to multiply endlessly.
64 posted on 09/16/2002 7:04:34 AM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Pistol
bump for later reading
65 posted on 09/16/2002 7:05:19 AM PDT by BruceS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: x
Safety rules are for p**** idiots who need them to stay outta the Darwin awards( of course they can't keep every idiot out but the soccer mommies will keep trying if it saves just one person... barf).
66 posted on 09/16/2002 7:08:22 AM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Pistol
Two more thoughts to add to the great -- and correct -- quotes in this thread:

* "Whom the gods would destroy, they first make insane" and

*"You can determine the level of corruption within a society by the numbers of its laws." Cincinnatus

Our destruction must surely be at hand!!!

67 posted on 09/16/2002 7:35:51 AM PDT by Dick Bachert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: x
We complained about the "conformism" of the 1950s and turned ourselves into individualist rebels. Now the degree of social control exercised by society comes back, vested this time in the state. I'd like to see less regulation, but some self-control will always be necessary to life in society. Perfect freedom, complete absence of external or internal constraints isn't given to man in society --

After watching a special on Iran and Iraq the other night I was amazed at the younger generations' distaste for the 'morality' police- women must wear a scarf on their heads at all times, any show of affection between couples could result in a beating, etc.

When people loath freedoms to such an extent that they desire to legislate them away in order to protect 'a child' (and get re-elected by the 'tough on crime' crowd), for instance, I'm reminded of the excesses of the State that exist in these two countries today.

Could it happen here? Certainly, it's only a matter of time and neglect. Neglect of our Founders' visions and guidlines set so well in our constitution and bill of rights. Would I wish anarchy on anyone? No. Only the strong would then survive.

The rules set forth in the Constitution and Bill of Rights were nothing less than a gun which 'we the people' held pointed in the direction of those in power who we might some day have to make 'dance' should they not do our bidding. Two or three live rounds have been replaced with blanks by the incrementalist socialists. The remaining three or four (in this wheel gun) are neatly being substituted by the incrementalist statists/collectivists.

If a live round exists at all, it may only come in the form of a complete repudiation of those violations of rights that now exist on the books and are being so taken for granted by most voters. So..

I'd like to be optimistic, but fail to see how a single live round will be enough to get anyone 'dancing'.

68 posted on 09/16/2002 5:55:24 PM PDT by budwiesest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Pistol
In 1902 in Chicago, a judge fined a man ten dollars for refusing to take off his hat in a theater.

I'm guessing that makes today about a $400 fine.

(If that don't offend you libertines, remember that weren't no 25-and-under single males owning sheep in Vermont back then, either...)
69 posted on 09/16/2002 7:19:03 PM PDT by nicollo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pistol
Great find! Thanks for posting it.

Regards,

70 posted on 09/16/2002 7:32:15 PM PDT by VermiciousKnid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnnaZ

71 posted on 09/17/2002 4:38:40 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: AnnaZ
It is the behavior of petty and stupid people, of minor minds over-empowered, ignorant, but angry and charmed to find that they can push others around. It is the exercise of power by people who have no business having any.

The corrupt democratic leftists pushing tyranny under the guise of socialisim being politikally korrect. The Clinton's...

72 posted on 09/17/2002 4:41:42 AM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
"Which of the "Bill of Rights" are still the absolute law of the land?"
>>Never say never. - 3rd amendment.

Sshhhhhh.....You and I may be the ONLY ones left that know that.....g

73 posted on 09/22/2002 5:47:18 PM PDT by S.O.S121.500
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson