From the Stoa today I wish to discuss Americans, America, and Generational turn-over.
I finished reading an article by an interesting fellow. Anyone who reads Rudyard Kipling is a realist in my book, and this fellow is a realist. You can read his entire article on "American Thinker, 082111", Martial Virtues and the survival of civilizations by James G. Wiles.
He hits on some very good points, points I've made for years, actually. There is a point in his article where I wish to expound. He goes into great, and very useful detail, about the larger political policy shifts on entitlement from the Civil War forward, but I wish to discuss the human and generational aspect of his article.
Here is the paragraph where I will continue my version of his article, in parallel with his own: "Thus, is it the chicken or the egg? Over at Canada's National Post, Fr. Raymond de Souza reviews Mark Steyn's important new book, After America. De Souza asks the correct question. Did the expanding state wither the individual, or did the withering of the individual lead to an expansion of the state?"
An outstanding question made by a man I respect, as much as I respect Mr. Steyn. Good men.
Now, this is where Mr. Wiles explores the macro sweeps of time, economics, China and such. I want to get back to the marrow the question that was posed. What did come first?
In a nutshell, the people who had the power to make those changes came first. I look at the wrecks that are called "citizens" of the welfare state and I see so much failed potential. So much waste in terms of money, humanity, and progress, both technological and cultural. But they are weak people, reliant on others for their support. Part of the hostility and sense of self-entitlement comes from, I believe, their conscience grinding on their every waking moment. It is not an easy thing being dependent upon others. They are not so stupid to not realize that the only reason they are able to eat, have a roof over their heads, and are able to drive to the next booze party is on the charity of others. Forced charity, that is, by a Democrat or well-intentioned useful idiot Republican.
Ponder that for a moment. The Democrats realized that they could create an eternal underclass, dependent upon them for money, food, booze, and shelter while in return, they keep voting for them to into office. However, it was not until the end of WWII and the 1950's that this really became possible.
Yes, there was T. Roosevelt and Wilson that lead the Progressive charge in the early 20th century, both from different motives, but that movement failed in large part. The prosperity of Coolidge allowed people to forget the terrible evil represented by Progressivism. T. Roosevelt was Progressive because he was sympathetic to the little man. He felt that guaranteeing charity and safety they could then grow to be who they were destined to be, as he did. Wilson was Progressive because he felt that this inferior rabble needed a shepherd and he was going to create the political over-class to see after them.
FDR warped the fabric further with his Socialistic power grab, but had much of his work undone in the Supreme Court. Enough got through, though. Enough was passed to doom his grandchildren. So that is the political rise. Policies that lead to the welfare state were passed by powerful people of each party. Each for their own intellectual reasons. Wilson, though, was more realistic in his forethought, though. This makes him a very bad man and Teddy a very ignorant one.
Our forefathers knew that cultural change was but a generation or two away. Evolution and extinction, just a generation away. Lenin and Hitler knew this. Reagan and Jefferson as well. By indoctrinating the children, you will change the far future. Those are just two evil examples, but lets explore the less evil examples.
Let's assume that LBJ was not an SOB out to turn the blacks of the 1960's into Democrat plantation slaves and assume that he passed his sweeping policies out of altruistic sources. His intention was to create a society where people were productive and inclusive. What he created was single moms and absent black fathers. People are not stupid. Humans have had about the same level of intellect for 50,000 years. They may be poor, ignorant and uneducated, but this underclass is not stupid by any measure of the word.
They saw quickly how the system could be gamed to their advantage. They were rewarded by not marrying. They were rewarded for every child they brought into the world. If you give away free money to a group of people, you will grow that group of people. Simple concept.
The British Empire went from being filled with tough-minded, industrious individuals to arrogant wastes of genetic material. You may know them by all the statues scattered across the GLOBE, reminding those who see them that the British were once a great people. Now, they are just like the inner city black and rural white trash. An ever expanding underclass that produces nothing but more underclass; and consumes ever more resources. The recent riots in London and elsewhere are flares warning everyone that something is seriously wrong with this way of life.
Social Security was started to help the elderly and to lessen the burden on the family that had to care for Grandma. It started at 65, which was well into elder hood and beyond the average life expectancy for that day. Over time, politicians saw an opportunity to expand the program to include more and more people for more and more reasons. People lived longer even as benefits were expanded. I'll continue to assume that this was done out of a Christian sense of altruism.
Medicare and Medicaid are similar examples. Programs that started with the best of intentions but have been expanded, fattened, and distorted until the very fabric of society has begun to unwind.
In the 1960's, I'm sure there were many an elderly black that shook their heads at the loss of pride their youngers had to suffer by going on the dole. I'm sure the first ones on the dole must have felt a sense of loss as well. However, it is THEIR children that grew up accepting that hand out. They never had to work for it, nor did they ever work for their keep. Now they feel entitled to that money, and angry that it does not grow along with their appetites for the finer things in life. Let the theoretical rich pay for everything, they are the ones who put me in my situation after all...they are more correct than they suspect.
So what came first? The children of the Great Depression, the ones who then went off to fight WWII and Korea; they are the ones I'm looking at. They had such a hard life as children that they did not want their children to suffer the same way. There was the economic boom after WWII and the Boom in children. They were going to create the world anew. Yes, they did GREAT things, that generation. But they also expanded these programs and spent the economic expansion well into the future, in the hopes that things would keep expanding. Their altruism and good intentions have lead to the expansion of this serf-like underclass. Our "Greatest Generation" has undone our Founding Fathers.
Think about that. The Yin and Yang of things. Our saviors and our destroyers.
I look forward to reading the future history of things to see how this plays out. We are not dead yet, as a martial people. There is MUCH life left within us yet. I am ever optimistic.
Live well.
--Zavost
No comments:
Post a Comment