Re: WARS
ard (rbrown@smb.sams.ch)
Thu, 15 May 1997 08:31:59 +0200
Recently we finished reading the 1200 page tome "Chronicles of the 20th
Century. We used it as a bathroom book, so each trip to the John allowed
us to read a day by day account of what the world, especially the United
States, was doing. It is amazing how what was being done by various
governments then would be unacceptable today. In many ways we "growing
up". But throughout history there have been people who want "a piece of
the action" without contributing to the action. Someone controls a pass to
the market and if you want to take your goods to the market you must pay
them in order to do so, etc. Over and over again the same scenario is
repeated; those merchants who are established want to prevent competition
and/or gain a special privelage and they use government to do so. All the
wars are just organized gangs of thieves using the people as cannon fodder
so the established merchants will prosper even more. Until there is a
"Seperation of State and Market" this scenario will continue. We may not
have wars as intense as before (the establishment could actually get hurt
the next time around), but we will have trade wars or government
regulations to achieve the same end. Keeping in mind the real purpose of
government (to protect the established businesses), we may wish to
reexamine history, if necessary, to see that Communism and Capitalism are
both ideas which function without the State. When the State is involved in
either of these ideas the ideas become corrupted. There has never been an
armed struggle between these two ideas, only struggle between groups
wanting a piece of the action. Merchantilism (with a small group of
wealthy merchants) called Capitalism has been on one side; Socialism, (with
a small group of politicians) called Communism has been on the other side.
Both groups were greatly enriched by using the State. Now there is such a
mix of Mechantilism and Socialism that there is not much difference between
various countries, only in degree. Socialism appears to be the modern
version of the Roman circuses; give the masses something to keep them
satisfied while you are stealing from them.
The United States did not go to war in 1917 to keep the World safe for
Democracy. Our excuse for getting into that war was to bring up, on April
6th 1917, the sinking of the Lusitania on May 15th,1915. The United States
did not go to war in 1941 to keep Herr Hitler from running Europe, they
were attacked by Japan, an ally of Germany. Germany had a free hand to
occupy Poland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, Holland, France, Yugoslavia and
Greece by June 1941. Their ally Italy, and "fellow fascist" Franco in
Spain pretty much put most of Europe into the same camp. If the U.S. was
trying to stop Hitler from "running Europe", they would not have stood by
while he marched into Prague on the Ides of March, 1939, or when he invaded
Poland on September 30th of the same year. The Second World War allowed
the United States to rise from the Depression and to allow government to
interfere in peoples lives as they had never done before; all with the
excuse that "we are at war".
With the seperation of the State and the Market, the causes of war would
cease, including the War on Drugs and other victimless crimes. Governments
would cease to be a tool of the "established businesses", donations would
dry up, most regulations would be scuttled, and people would be more in
charge of their own lives. Governments would naturally shrink drastically.
A few years ago an economist won the Pulitzer for showing the correlation
between government regulation and efficiency of the economy; any
interference makes it less efficient; the more interference the more
inefficient it becomes. So why is interference tolerated? Tradition. And
we all know that "Tradition is easier than thinking." Let's hear it one
more time for Seperation of State and Market.
ard