rw
The problem as I see it: We talk about a balance of power between the executive, legislative, and judiciary. But a similar balance of power should exist (but does not) between government, business, and the citizenry.
We the citizenry need to control government because we have far less chance of controlling powerful business interests than we do government. Yet from my perspective the small government folks, as exemplified by kootchman’s last post, would in effect abdicate power to business at government’s and our (the people’s) expense.
Take the environment, for example. It seems to me a true conservative would follow a creed similar to the medical profession’s hypocratic oath: “first do no harm.” But so-called conservatives in this country don’t give a fart about potential environmental consequences if a potentially profitable proposal, whether mining, nuclear power, unregulated fishing, etc. serves the interests of the profit motive.
That’s also why they prefer to hand the citizenry like lambs for fleecing to insurance companies, banks, etc. God forbid if we had succeeded in achieving a single payer health care system rather than one that leaves even the best savers vulnerable to bankruptcy in case of major illness. As long as it’s good for business (profits), that is all that matters.
Meanwhile false assurances such as rallying for gun rights or low taxes gives these folks the illusion they are free.
I would argue that the citizens of a high tax country such as Sweden in many ways are more free than we in a country with much lower tax rates. I am not looking to move, but I am also under no illusions that the conservative/Republican solutions would lead to greater freedom or prosperity (at least not for the overwhelming majority of people).
In the early part of our nation’s history, one of the great political debates was between the more egalitarian northerners and the aristocratic southern landowners. The landowners felt that it was there right to decide what was good for everyone. Slavery was the most extreme example of this, but even poorer whites were also considered less capable of deciding matters of public importance. That conviction led in large part to the civil war.
Today we have a similar tension, but it is between the new aristocracy, the 1% if you will, who control business, and the ordinary people. Too many ordinary people have somehow become convinced that their interests align with the interests of the Kochs, Murdochs, etc., more than their interests are served by defending or using government to influence priorities on behalf of people. Government is by no means perfect, or perfectly efficient. But I do not get the notion of hobbling or neutering government and handing over power and our futures to the likes to big business.