Libertarian concerns, anarchy and hoedowns

And the beat goes on. The idea that you and I can handle the problems presented us was stored in a box long ago and placed with other artifacts -- as we all now know it takes a government village, smart-people and a pile of regulations that makes the Tower of Babble look like a Lego construction. A person could ask why it is that we can't take care of ourselves, but that person would be silly and we could ignore him like a loser sporting a plaid coat and white socks. The point is that power says we need power and power doesn't have to say things twice. Just mind what business you have left and don't worry about things that smart-people handle -- you're covered.

Government power has never been rational -- it's Kafkaesque -- the dark push against the will with little or no light for clarity or reason. Government has to be limited by an unambiguous Constitution in which the nation believes, because it's nature is to grow and control, and this is the question -- is it possible for a nation to maintain a constitutionally limited government? History has answered this question with a loud guffaw -- but history's cynicism doesn't have to be the future's hopeless harbinger (this is alliteration), does it? That's a good question, I say to myself, although I have no good answer.

I swore I could never be an anarchist because of the way I arrange my sock drawer, but here I sit wondering if all forms of government are uncontrollable, unlimitable (is that a word?). Having never been a part of government, I don't know what it feels like to be able to physically contol other people, so I imagine myself in a position of power whereby I could influence legislation in order to coerce others to do as I want, but I can't see myself going along with other representatives to create a law that would force individuals to do something against their will when these individuals aren't violating anyone's rights to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness -- yet, I can see where people with the gift for control could do so with no damage at all done to their conscience -- I had a principal in high school like this. The principal placed a ban on shorts and I wore shorts one hot day in defiance. The prinicipal answered my question of why we couldn't wear shorts with one of those answers that slowly educate the innocent on the arbitrariness of power - "Because I've decided it's in the best interest of everyone here to not wear shorts". My persistence to get a better answer got me expelled.

There are lots of people who seem to think they know what's best for everyone. When you consider the number of people in the legislative, judicial and executive branches of government who can make or influence laws, it's really a tiny fraction of the population. It's surreal in many ways that this tiny fraction of the population wields so much power, especially when you consider how they can manipulate around the Constitution and not necessarily represent the public will -- surreal and frightening, actually. Yet, here we are after all is said and done since 1776. Our government is out of control and before you know it we can't wear shorts. I thought adulthood would offer much more liberty, but I'm 55 and considering anarchy as a viable option to a constitutionally limited republic. Am I overreacting? Surely we can devise a truly limited government made up of reasonable public servants who answer to and are controlled by the rule of law.

But, alas, we're but a few weeks away from the beginning of the largest statist hoedown in history. I've written lightly but I'm dead serious. I might be wrong, but I believe this the beginning of the end of statism in the US. That's a wildly optimistic prediction, but it seems we're prepared to go full bore, and it will scare the hell out of everybody and break the bank for a long time to come.

If I'm wrong, may God help us all.