Musings on the need for government and our
complicity in its failure
By
Richard W. Crockett
The Wall Street Journal's Washington
editor Gerald Seib noted last week. "A political system that expects
failure doesn't try very hard to produce anything else," and I would add
that a political party with a doctrine that holds that Ògovernment is the
problem,Ó has trouble producing anything but failure when it holds power. This happens when a political party serves
only the interests of large private capital or privilege.
Private capitalism, which we may
think of as the super rich and the super corporation on the march, is often
resentful of effective government and prefers ÒefficientÓ government (except
when it needs a bailout) because effective government inevitably limits the
scope of private power. Private
capitalism has historically been anti-government. This was especially so with respect to Communist regimes, in
particular, and it is understandable, because communism was a doctrine that
directly targeted and would abolish not only capitalÕs sphere of influence
within the state, but would abolish private capital itself. But private
capitalism looks upon even benign forms of government with suspicion and alarm
because government may assess a duty on it for the service of establishing the
rules of play. In this view
government in any form threatens to extract money from private capital and
therefore is often labeled with being confiscatory when it collects taxes,
although large private enterprise has been relieved of much of this burden
under the present American regime under the scam of Òsupply sideÓ or Òtrickle
downÓ economics. Accordingly,
partisan attacks upon government and support for the view favoring tax breaks
for the privileged and for abdication of governmental responsibility are
examples of the influence of private capital over sympathetic listeners. Someone quipped last week that GOP no
longer stands for ÒGrand Old Party,Ó but now stands for ÒGas and Oil Party.Ó
The anti government view also runs
part and parcel with the principal of reducing government, even to the level of
incompetence, by undercutting its financial base as well as its psychological
outlook. In its perceived
self-interest private capital pushes a low tax-low service ideology for
governmental policy. The low tax part of the ideology helps private capitalism
and the low service part of the ideology hurts ordinary people. For ordinary
people, the low tax-low service ideology appeals to our individualism and our
stinginess, our avarice or greed.
In societies governed by the rule of law government makes rules, but
whether in robbing a bank or in running one, avarice and greed are inherently
hostile to following rules. In the case of robbing a bank the robber sees to it
that the rules are ignored. In the
case of running a bank the bankers through their elected officials may see to
it that the rules are never enacted.
When rules are enacted the large
economic interests have come to be in charge of their enactment through the
control of governmental institutions because we donÕt vote and we have been
suckered into their silly and self-serving theories of governance. The enacted rules nearly always have
come to serve the interests of the few rather than the many. Remember the conventional
wisdom that the Golden Rule is,
Òthem who has the gold gets to make the rules.Ó We see this with the various attempts
at bailing out the banking system in the present mortgage crisis. Attention is
given only reluctantly to homeowners struggling to pay, with all kinds of
conditions and limitations on any assistance that they may receive, but great
attention and assistance is given to large mortgage houses pilfering the
governmental till. This can happen
because little people have been taught and convinced that government is
incompetent and bad, that their vote doesnÕt count, that if you vote it only
encourages Ôem, and that they are all crooks. So, we donÕt vote.
If we do vote, we cast a vote Òagainst the government,Ó for that is
where our anger is directed. But
remember this. I submit that it is
our own fault. Because politics is
a team sport, and you and I are on that team, and it is played best when each
citizen pulls his political weight. Citizens who are brainwashed into the view
that government cannot succeed are talking about themselves because they are
themselves supposed to be the government and they have not been prepared to be
very good citizens. Such teaching
is like a football coach exhorting to his players on the futility of playing
the game. Do think that would help
them win? Or do you think that they would lose?
07/31/08