Wikileaks and government power
After a barrage of linguistic assault against liberals and the Obama administration, the closing paragraphs of Justin Raimondo's article about about liberal disdain for Wikileaks forwards this astute observation:
"This is blowback, guys: the very spying and surveillance you wanted as weapons in the "war on terrorism" are now being turned on critics of a liberal Democratic administration."
The article itself describes U.S. Government and liberal media opposition to Wikileaks and its founder, Julian Assange. Whether you believe the Collateral Murder video is legit or not, it has certainly stirred up a hornets nest and pro-government types are unleashing their unhappy responses in a variety of ways.
But the blowback point above is not limited to spying and surveillance. Those topics might be brought to the forefront of our minds by this article, but the idea of government power to 'do good' can be applied to just about any topic-du-jure.
Neocons want 'security' and use government power to produce an image of it any chance they get (PATRIOT act, TSA, DHS, Afghanistan, Iraq, and so on). Liberals want 'equality' (also known as communism) and use government power to produce an image of it any chance they get (No Child Left Behind, universal healthcare, mortgage bailouts, and so on).
The blowback concept is simply using the other side's 'good' against them. The above example is apt, but there are countless more. How about marriage? Conservatives started using government force with marriage licensing long ago, presumably to 'protect' marriage. Liberals subsequently used the (now) existing government power against conservatives by sanctioning less-appealing forms of marriage such as interracial marriage (gasp) and, more recently, homosexual marriage. Conservatives, with mixed success, have turned around and banned homosexual marriage in some places. The debate rages on with more and more people on both sides harmed by government in the process.
Apply this concept to taxes, education, 'security', healthcare, welfare, or any other topic and you'll see a recurring theme. When government power is used to achieve some presumed good, that same power will subsequently be used against those who instituted it in the first place.
This kind of blowback is made possible by the initiation of government force. Government coercion is where the problem starts and must be stopped to end this kind of blowback. Instead of using government force to achieve our goals, we should use voluntary cooperation. Government should not initiate aggression against individuals and the associations they voluntarily form. Government's maximum role should be to protect individuals from that kind of force.
Unfortunately, a large percentage of Americans fail to recognize this trap. Liberals cried foul for years as the Bush administration used government power to destroy civil liberties and wage expensive and deadly wars. Smug neocons rejoiced in their victory until they became the losers under the new liberal administration. Now liberals are using the existing government tools against the neocons while smugly grinning over their newly created socialized-everything paradigm. Of course, they'll cry foul again when the next administration socks it to them in return - a power shift already in the making.
At every step along this trail, government grows bigger and everyone loses. Until we realize that and start refusing to use government power to get our way, we'll keep losing. The blowback is enormous and it has brought what was once the freest and most powerful nation in the world to brink of destruction in a very short time.
For those who understand that the use of government force really is the problem, one might ask what, if any, role government might play in society? The answer lies in the immoral cause of this problem: government initiates force against individuals and the groups they voluntarily associate with. That initiation of force isn't just wrong when government does it, it's wrong all the time. For a political government to exist morally, it must first not initiate force against individuals, and second go no further than protecting individuals' rights against such aggression from others (usually known as criminals).
When government goes any further than protecting individuals' rights to life, liberty, and property, it does so in violation of those rights and becomes inherently immoral. The example of blowback raised above is just one more reason we should work towards a society governed morally: a society where the maximum role of government is the protection of life, liberty and property.
V-
"This is blowback, guys: the very spying and surveillance you wanted as weapons in the "war on terrorism" are now being turned on critics of a liberal Democratic administration."
The article itself describes U.S. Government and liberal media opposition to Wikileaks and its founder, Julian Assange. Whether you believe the Collateral Murder video is legit or not, it has certainly stirred up a hornets nest and pro-government types are unleashing their unhappy responses in a variety of ways.
But the blowback point above is not limited to spying and surveillance. Those topics might be brought to the forefront of our minds by this article, but the idea of government power to 'do good' can be applied to just about any topic-du-jure.
Neocons want 'security' and use government power to produce an image of it any chance they get (PATRIOT act, TSA, DHS, Afghanistan, Iraq, and so on). Liberals want 'equality' (also known as communism) and use government power to produce an image of it any chance they get (No Child Left Behind, universal healthcare, mortgage bailouts, and so on).
The blowback concept is simply using the other side's 'good' against them. The above example is apt, but there are countless more. How about marriage? Conservatives started using government force with marriage licensing long ago, presumably to 'protect' marriage. Liberals subsequently used the (now) existing government power against conservatives by sanctioning less-appealing forms of marriage such as interracial marriage (gasp) and, more recently, homosexual marriage. Conservatives, with mixed success, have turned around and banned homosexual marriage in some places. The debate rages on with more and more people on both sides harmed by government in the process.
Apply this concept to taxes, education, 'security', healthcare, welfare, or any other topic and you'll see a recurring theme. When government power is used to achieve some presumed good, that same power will subsequently be used against those who instituted it in the first place.
This kind of blowback is made possible by the initiation of government force. Government coercion is where the problem starts and must be stopped to end this kind of blowback. Instead of using government force to achieve our goals, we should use voluntary cooperation. Government should not initiate aggression against individuals and the associations they voluntarily form. Government's maximum role should be to protect individuals from that kind of force.
Unfortunately, a large percentage of Americans fail to recognize this trap. Liberals cried foul for years as the Bush administration used government power to destroy civil liberties and wage expensive and deadly wars. Smug neocons rejoiced in their victory until they became the losers under the new liberal administration. Now liberals are using the existing government tools against the neocons while smugly grinning over their newly created socialized-everything paradigm. Of course, they'll cry foul again when the next administration socks it to them in return - a power shift already in the making.
At every step along this trail, government grows bigger and everyone loses. Until we realize that and start refusing to use government power to get our way, we'll keep losing. The blowback is enormous and it has brought what was once the freest and most powerful nation in the world to brink of destruction in a very short time.
For those who understand that the use of government force really is the problem, one might ask what, if any, role government might play in society? The answer lies in the immoral cause of this problem: government initiates force against individuals and the groups they voluntarily associate with. That initiation of force isn't just wrong when government does it, it's wrong all the time. For a political government to exist morally, it must first not initiate force against individuals, and second go no further than protecting individuals' rights against such aggression from others (usually known as criminals).
When government goes any further than protecting individuals' rights to life, liberty, and property, it does so in violation of those rights and becomes inherently immoral. The example of blowback raised above is just one more reason we should work towards a society governed morally: a society where the maximum role of government is the protection of life, liberty and property.
V-