Meridia. Meridia coupon. Buy meridia. Meridia no persciption….

For sure, there are people who either cannot or will not accept the responsibility that comes with true freedom.

Then there are others who refuse to use freedom responsibily, preferring instead to view their fellow humans as a sort of prey.

It is surely in the self interest of the capable to provide these people with a system that affords them all the freedom they can responsibly handle, while withholding that which they cannot handle.

And, I make no secret of the fact that I do not think such people should have the privilege of the vote.

It is obvious that each of us tends to act in our own self interest. We not only want to be free, safe and secure, we want comfort and entertainment, we want to enjoy life to the fullest. This is as it should be.

And, I think that the best approach to achieving this should also be the most economical. Economical in terms of effort, resources, risk, etc.

Therefore, I propose that the best approach is that of ENLIGHTENED self interest. That is, devising and participating in a system where we get what we want while giving other participants what they want in the process. This way, they should actually want to do it our way, based on their own enlightened self interest. This must, be definition, also offer the most economy.

I further propose that a free and open marketplace, unencumbered by government “assistance” offers the best mechanism for achieving this – at least the best humans have devised so far.

In other words, I am preaching Objectivism without really saying so.

Thanks for commenting and keep it coming!

On the issue of control of others, perhaps it goes further than that. Is it not so that all living organisms respond to their environment, that if their responses are life sustaining they tend to survive if not they tend to perish. One method of responding to an environmental stimulus is to seek to control it. To enhance the stimulus if it is pleasant and to suppress it if unpleasant. To shortcut the logical train of reasoning here, it does not appear to be irrational for one person to control another as long as Force or fraud are not involved. If we reward a person for behaviour which enhances our relationship and discourage behaviour which we find unpleasant as long as the relationship remains voluntary I don’t see the control issue as irrational. It can of course be irrational if the means of control involves the afore mentioned force or fraud. If our efforts to control a relationship are irrational they will tend to distance the realtions, if they are rational they will tend to enhance the relationship.
Just a thought.

Great post, as usual. I know for a fact that more people are reading your stuff than are commenting on it.

Looking around and participating on other blogs (where I get to leave breadcrumbs leading back to mine), I notice that very few require preregistration before posting a comment. This puts an extra burden on the blogger, because he has to delete spam more often; but I think it does encourage more comments. I may modify mine to allow for instant comment access and see if more discussions ensue.

As to your hypothesis regarding control issues, I am not so sure that most sheeple are demonstrating an offensive (as opposed to defensive) trait. I have identified the cancer on our body politic as the righteous moral code battle between the Politically Correct moralists on the Left, and the Piously Correct moralists on the Right. Since ours is meant to be a secular government, these two religious camps ought not be allowed to wage their morality campaigns in our electoral politics arena.

The interesting thing is that, while they both have their preachers goading their flocks, I think most of their followers are playing defense. Remember Sally? She took the field on both teams, and in each case she was paranoid that the other side was bent on destroying her world. If both sides think they are on defense, perhaps there is hope.

One of the more interesting questions I like to pose, when on occasion I have a conversation with someone who actually has the ability to think, is, “Would you be willing to give up your need to control others, if they agreed to leave you alone to live your life as you choose to live it.” After reflection and maybe some discussion for clarity, the answer is usually, “Yes.”

So, it is the shamans we need to throttle; and then somehow to get back to secular government, where forcing moral litmus tests on our candidates is verboten. I am not sure how to do that; but I do think it is the correct prescription. ◄Dave►