Jeff Thomas | Sep 17th 2019, 10:28:38 am
Governments are in the flim-flam business. Pared down to the bare essentials, governments can be very useful in passing and enforcing a small number of very basic laws. These laws should be limited to policing those who would seek to aggress against others, or their property. Governments may also have a value in providing protection from invasion – organizing an army of able-bodied people to address this collective problem, if and when it occurs. And that’s about it. Beyond that, the private sector can, and almost always does, do a better job at virtually everything else. Therefore, a government should be small, cost very little to run and do as little as possible.
By Jeff Thomas, feature writer for Strategic Wealth Preservation, Doug Casey's International Man and 321gold.com
Governments are in the flim-flam business.
Pared down to the bare essentials, governments can be very useful in passing and enforcing a small number of very basic laws. These laws should be limited to policing those who would seek to aggress against others, or their property. Governments may also have a value in providing protection from invasion – organizing an army of able-bodied people to address this collective problem, if and when it occurs.
And that’s about it. Beyond that, the private sector can, and almost always does, do a better job at virtually everything else. Therefore, a government should be small, cost very little to run and do as little as possible.
But since a government already exists, why not have it do more? Why not assign to it some of those tasks that tend not to attract businessmen?
Well, the simple, but almost universally little-understood reason is that governments do not actually produce anything. They are, in fact, a parasitical construct that consumes money, but creates nothing of worth.
Unlike businesses, they don’t operate on a profit basis. In fact, few politicians or civil servants have any grasp of the concept that prosperity is only created when someone invests his money in a venture, creates a profit and saves or re-invests the difference.
Although this may seem like a harsh criticism, it’s borne out by the fact that all governments consume money and are more wasteful than any business would be. Worse, politicians and civil servants typically fail entirely to understand that this is a fundamental problem.
And yet, like all people, people in governments wish to personally advance, both in position and financial worth.
And here is where the perennial bugbear of governments appears.
Since governments, by rights, should never expand unless absolutely necessary, and since this is never enough for those who people any government, they must somehow con the public into believing that government expansion is “for the good of the people.”
Ergo, even the smallest of governments, in the smallest of jurisdictions, will learn to cajole the public. As the government grows, the con-game grows and duplicity, trickery and skullduggery become the lifeblood of the government – any government.
The con-game becomes, “Vote for me and I’ll provide you with something at the expense of someone else.”
“It is the primary business of any government to grow its own power and wealth at the expense of its people.”
At some point, all governments figure out that the greatest way to expand their own power and personal wealth is through fear. If a people can be made afraid, the government can bypass reason and appeal to emotion – always an easier sell.
For millennia, governments (like organised religions and for the same reason) have peddled the fear of a demon – usually in the form of an aggressive opponent from outside the jurisdiction who can be regarded as wishing to aggress against the country. In modern times. However, the spin doctors have done this concept one-better – they’ve learned to peddle, not an individual, country or army as the demon, but a concept.
As the reader will know, in recent decades, all any government has needed to do is claim that something that they oppose is related somehow to terrorism and they will be given carte blanche to crush it, however implausible the given reasoning may be.
Another highly successful demon is Climate Change.
The Climate Change concept was invented out of whole fabric by the Club of Rome, which was created in 1968 by David Rockefeller. It was originally called “Global Cooling,” as, at that time, the earth was passing through one of its cyclic cooling periods. However, that period soon came to an end and the earth entered a global warming period. So, the same “science” that was used for Global Cooling was then attributed without any change whatever to the new “Global Warming.”
When that cycle ended and the proponents of Global Warming again had egg on their faces for pushing warming during a new periodic cooling cycle, the proponents finally got clever and renamed it “Climate Change.”
From that day forward, any flood, drought, hurricane, tornado or variation in the ice caps has immediately been blamed on “increased Climate Change,” even though such occurrences have been with us forever and will be with us forever.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has repeatedly polled scientists as to whether they agree that climate change exists, and the IPCC states that over 97% agree. What is not asked is whether Climate Change is a direct result of man’s intervention. Asked if climate changes from time to time, the answer is, of course, “yes.” In fact, 100% of scientists should agree, based upon the wording of the question.
But, of course, this is not science at all, but deception. Always phrase the question in such a way that you will receive the desired answer.
So, the outcome is that the great majority of people are sold on the idea that Climate Change is due to man’s creation of CO2 and that mankind has to be controlled, or he will destroy the planet with CO2 emissions.
Since “scientists” are represented as agreeing on this, a people tend not to question the logic. The fact that all plants breathe CO2 and would die without it and that, if all plant life were to expire, all animal life would then expire, does not occur to the listener. His government has spoken and he needs to be afraid.
Since the mid-1970s, politicians have periodically claimed that life on earth will come to an end in a decade or so if emissions are not eliminated globally. Whenever one of these deadlines passes, the presenters simply move up the date another decade or so, maintaining the fear, but never actually reaching the end of the world.
Of course, the Great Lie should be exposed, due to the fact that governments do not actually pass laws to eliminate CO2 emissions, they merely create taxation and fines for those manufacturers who create CO2.
So, apparently, it’s all right to end the world, if you pay a hefty tax, instead of cutting CO2.
“The Jews will destroy Germany”… “The Iranians will destroy the world if they can make a nuclear bomb”… ”Your car will destroy the earth”… but Air Force One, which creates 336 times the CO2 of a car, will not.
With government propaganda, the sky is always falling.
All the best propaganda appeals at a gut level. If people can be made to abandon reason and accept government-created fear, they can be controlled.
This doesn’t mean that governments can’t ever be trusted, but it means that they shouldn’t ever be trusted. They should always be questioned, not only as their propaganda is so often false, but as they are, inherently, in the flim-flam business.
Viva la Revolución? | May 30, 2023
The Scary Truth About Living in Big Cities During the Turbulent Times Ahead | May 17, 2023
Duesenberg in a Barn | Apr 26, 2023