Written by David Desautel   

Conservatives, Libertarians, and others are always assailing us with the evils of big government. But what does this mean exactly? They seem to want government out of some things, but not others. Free enterprise, laissez-faire, and the “invisible hand” theory all point to allowing business a free hand (no pun intended) in whatever they want to do. State rights advocates seem to think states can individually control everything for their residents without impacting other states or the country. Gun ownership, land use, and property rights all indicate an individual freedom to do whatever you want on your own property, and even on public property.

On the other side of the coin, most of these same folks won’t even whisper big government when it comes to their propensity to want to control the behavior of others when it comes to their moral and religious beliefs. Sexual behavior, religious beliefs, and morality are all fair game for government intervention, as long as it adheres to their narrow definitions of these concepts.

So, let’s start the reduction of big government by legalizing prostitution, abortion, pornography, drugs, and marriage for anyone (including group marriage, man-on-dog, and any other combination you can think of). Let’s give the state and local governments the power to ban Christianity in favor of Mormon or Buddhist beliefs. While we are at it, let’s remove all regulations and controls on the truth of advertising, the safety of drugs, vehicles, and air traffic, and anything else that might be protecting citizens while preventing huge businesses from making their extra billions in profits.

The truth of the matter is that these concepts of big government or small government, state & individual rights, and just about any other concept involving the running of a society are subjective and not really based in reality. Yes, most of us would agree that a total dictatorship, the ultimate in big government intrusion, is a bad thing. We would probably also agree that total individual freedom, which means survival of the fittest, is bad because it means just that – only the biggest, strongest, smartest, or most ruthless survive. The rest of us would be dead or in slavery. So, something in between, which requires an extremely difficult balancing act, is what is needed.

The problem with most Conservatives is that they are just plain hypocrites – whether consciously or unconsciously. What they really want is the freedom to do whatever they want, including controlling what everyone else does. The problem with Libertarians is that they are in love with the concepts of small government and personal freedoms, but have no understanding of the practicality and reality of what these concepts really mean.

The simple truth is that there is no such thing as total & complete individual freedom. Even if you were the only human being in the universe, your behavior is still limited by the laws of physics and nature. Beyond that, the presence of multiple human beings in the same vicinity produces a concept known as competition – the battle to control & consume resources that are not infinite. The more people, the more competition, and the more limitations on behavior. In other words the possible degree of individual freedom is inversely related to the density of the population.

What this means is that the need for SOCIAL rules & laws, limiting individual behavior, is directly related to the density of the population. Otherwise, you have what we call “survival of the fittest,” which is nature’s way of reducing the population density to match the available resources. That may sound good if you are lucky enough to be one of the fittest, but for the bulk of the population it is not going to work out very well.

Government is nothing more than a mechanism for creating and enforcing the social rules & laws required to prevent the population from being reduced to one. Conservatives and Libertarians like to talk about the lack of efficiency in government. Well, the simplest and most efficient form of government is a dictatorship, with one master and millions of slaves. Efficiency, of course, cannot be defined in a vacuum. It can only be defined in light of a desired goal or outcome. The uniqueness of the great American experiment, known as Democracy, is that for the first time the agreed-upon desired goal for government is to maximize the freedoms, liberties, affluence, and happiness of ALL citizens, not just an elite few. And that is a balancing act of huge proportions.

So, what is the size and nature of government that would be most efficient AND effective is achieving that goal? That is the question that needs to be objectively (not subjectively) answered, and answered in light of the realities imposed by limited resources, population density, and the nature and practicality of life in a society where the overriding goal is to maximize benefits to all members of the society. This does not mean simply dividing the money and resources equally among all of society’s members. That would ignore the reality of the nature of human beings, which is that we are all different, with different needs, wants, and goals. Just as every individual is different, so is their definition of the concept of “maximization” of freedom, liberty, affluence and happiness. These terms mean different things to each of us, and we are all also different is the amount and type of efforts we are willing to make in achieving our individual goals.

But what this goal for society DOES mean is that all of society’s members must have the same opportunities to fulfill their individual goals and satisfy their individual needs. This is not the “equal opportunity” that has been defined by government for businesses in the past. What “same opportunities” in this context means is that society strives to ensure that equal “levels” of effort and participation result in equal “levels” of needs & goal fulfillment. The nature and content of both sides of this equation (efforts & participation = needs & goal fulfillment) will be as different and individual as people are different and individual.

So, why do the “big government” rhetoric, theories, and demands of Conservatives & Libertarians NOT achieve this unique American ideal as purported? Why do their big three contentions (freedom for business, freedom for individuals, and all power to the states) actually destroy this American ideal instead of achieving it? Let’s take a brief look.

The fatal flaw in laissez-faire and pure capitalism is the fact that one of the ways that those who seek power and wealth can achieve their goals is to PREVENT others from having the same opportunities to reach their desired level of affluence and happiness. In other words, without regulation, the system can be “gamed.” Without government-imposed limitations, the captains of industry can engage in extremely profitable practices that are harmful, and even fatal (in the case of health care and prescription drugs) to their customers. Those who are naive claim that doing that would kick in some kind of “invisible hand” self-correcting process that would punish those engaging in these practices. This ignores the very real possibility of necessities being controlled by monopolies and top executives being willing to make a fast billion and then quit the business. The false assumption here is that all big business decision makers place the LONG-TERM success of the business as their highest priority. I believe the actions of executives on Wall Street and in the financial industry over the last 10 years has shown just how false that assumption can be.

What about the ideas supporting the movement of more power and control from the federal government to the state and local governments? Well, maybe if this were still the 1700′s those ideas might have some merit. The realities of the 20th century are vastly different than the 1700′s. It is simply not possible or practical for states to have more control, especially in light of the federal government’s responsibility to seek the goal of Democracy as explained above for ALL citizens. Exactly what aspects of modern life can be successfully contained & controlled within the borders of a local or state government? Pollution, communication technology (the Internet, telephones, cell phones, radio, television), population mobility, interstate commerce, and a million other aspects of today’s reality simply ignore political borders. As the world shrinks, as we all know it has, decentralized control becomes more and more impossible. Besides, the supposed proponents of smaller government, the Republicans, now that they have taken control of states like Michigan, are actually using local budget problems as an excuse to seize control of these local areas away from their duly elected officials by sending in state “Emergency Managers” who have total power over all decisions. Just how is that in line with wanting smaller and more localized government??

The final mantra of Conservatives & Libertarians discussed in this article is the idea of individual rights and freedoms, as applied to things like gun ownership, land use, religion, property rights, and others. It is worth mentioning again that these rights do not seem to extend to things like same-sex marriage, pornography, prostitution, and non-Christian religions. As I said – very hypocritical. But beyond all that still lies the same realities of population density and limited resources. Your individual rights, including freedom of speech, do NOT extend to the point where exercising them suppresses the individual rights of others. Where that stopping point lies depends on what rights you are exercising and the density of population. Your activities, even on your own land and in your own house, cannot endanger the lives or rights of your neighbors. If you live in the middle of 100 acres of your own land, building that bomb in your basement is probably not a big problem. But if you live on a small lot in a crowded residential area, it is a whole different story. You think you have the right to smoke in public areas? Fine, just do NOT exhale and pollute the air others have to breath. That is infringing on their right to breath safely. There are a million such examples, and they all follow the same theme – Conservatives and Libertarians simply do not consider the big picture when it comes to the extolling of the greatness of individual and state rights.

This article is not opinion. It is simply a logical analysis of facts, reason, and reality. Maximizing the benefits of life for a POPULATION means reducing the rights and behaviors of INDIVIDUALS. That is simply a fact of life. To end this article, I will include several small statements I call “simple truths.” These are logical observations of life in American politics.

1. You cannot have freedom OF religion unless you first have freedom FROM religion
2. So-called “jobs creators” do not create jobs because they get more money, but ONLY when they get more demand from consumers
3. Sustainable wealth can only come from adding value to the lives of the 99%. Stealing it from them is not sustainable
4. The largest “redistribution of wealth” in history was the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy
5. Our “equal pain” taxation system has been completely negated. No pain at the top, and excessive pain in the middle & bottom
6. No regulation, no accountability, no justice
7. The fatal flaw in unregulated Capitalism – personal wealth is allowed to become the priority, at the expense of the business
8. The 1% depend on a healthy and economically sound 99%
9. Every $ seniors must spend on health care is a $ they can’t spend on products
10. The end point of completely unregulated capitalism is that one person owns everything
11. The extent of individual freedom MUST be curtailed as population density increases. That’s reality
12. Another million for the top 100 will not stimulate the economy. Another $100 for the bottom million will boost the economy
13. The idea of “equal representation” is intended to be on a per person basis, NOT on a per dollar basis
14. What makes the economy strong and the nation healthy is the MEDIAN level of wealth, NOT the AVERAGE
15. Corporations are made up of thousands of people, but only the top few make decisions, why give them double person hood?
16. Democrats try to inform voters to get elected, #GOP tries to fool them
17. Conservatives cannot see past their own immediate self-interests, making them easy targets for deceit & manipulation
18. Without sensible regulation, the “invisible hand” of the free market is easily shackled by the greedy “gaming” the system
19. Massive spending on politics is NOT freedom of speech. It IS legalized extortion and bribery
20. You cannot give Freedom of Speech to Corporations when there is little Freedom of Speech WITHIN corporations
21. Immigration – the “Guilty until proven innocent” arm of law enforcement
22. Face it, not all Republicans are racist, but most racists are Republican
23. In a free-market system, gaining wealth by preventing others from fulfilling their potential is ultimately self-defeating
24. Hearing voices in your head telling you what to do is a symptom of mental illness, AND of religious fervor
25. The Constitution does not protect freedom to suppress the rights of others
26. Indefinite detainment is illegal, unconstitutional, un-American, inhumane, heinous, and a violation of everything American
27. America needs to be transformed, not reformed or regressed
28. Stimulating the economy via tax cuts works best at the bottom. Diminishing returns makes tax cuts for millionaires useless
29. Reality is an opinion-free zone
30. The laws of economics are like the laws of physics. Move everything to the top & gravity takes over and causes a collapse
31. Christianity is not about influencing politics to force your beliefs on others. So what religion is the religious Right?