Dangerous Labels - A careful reading of
the label might not help!
by Ted Lang
June 25, 2002
Most
of us are familiar with the snake oil salesmen of yesteryear who purveyed their
"harmless" elixirs and potions to the unsuspecting masses prior to government
scrutiny. Their remedies purportedly could cure rheumatism, hair loss and any
assortment of ailments. Their activities, as well as that of other questionable
capitalist enterprises predating "government protection," ushered in the muckrakers
of the "progressive" era. That era "progressed" and evolved into the establishment
of the Food and Drug Administration and our emphasis on content labeling.
Most prominent and problematical of the conditions attendant to our American journey nowadays, is not the content of our consumables, but the intent of our political philosophies, which is beginning to take on more meaningful dimension as regards the crisis of burgeoning government. Some writers have endeavored to clarify varying political thrusts but have generally muddied the waters. We have Democrats and Republicans, Greens and Reds, Conservatives and Liberals, and Constitutionalists and Libertarians. We have further layers, such as paleo-libertarians and neo-conservatives, or as they are derogatorily referred to, "neocons."
Politics is complicated enough without adding these dimensions making it more so. I used to fret when libertarians would write ream after ream ranting about "neocons." If America is banned from using the term "communist," which is really the main thrust of American politics today, why waste my time and that of other Americans trying to introduce us to a term that for the most part is lost on the average Joe Six-pack? As much as our polished and highly articulate Internet scribes are versed with these terms, America is for the most part conversant only in the vernacular of same said Mr. Six-pack.
Let’s face it – Democrats no longer espouse the principles of the Democratic Party, and Republicans are no longer Republicans. Today, these terms are totally meaningless. Of course, our government’s supportive two party political system is increasingly intransigent as regards a much needed revised approach, especially when considering their profitable collaboration with the manipulative one-party media and the former’s resistance to, and obstruction of, new third and fourth parties.
It seems that every time American politics takes a new turn, someone has to assign a label to it. The result? Less and less attention is paid to the new moniker resulting in just the opposite of the outcome intended. Take for example the recent attacks upon anyone who even casually criticizes the Bush administration. Whether it is Bill Bennett’s attempt to silence critics, or National Review’s revulsion of accurately comparing Bush to Hitler relative to the former’s unjustified high popularity, vigilance directed at American government is attacked as being unpatriotic.
But these attacks are not based upon what is or is not in the Constitution such that the practices of government can be appropriately analyzed. The criteria for these attacks on analytical thinking stem from party loyalties. In other words, the maneuvers of its leaders are evaluated as to what is best for the party, and not what is in the best interests of the people and therefore most compliant with our rule of law as stated in the Constitution of the United States.
What we have, therefore, is the fallacious competition of the two party political system which compromises the vigilance required ensuring government legitimization by way of the Constitution. It is similar to the motivational deviation that can be identified with the deranged intent of a so-called football or auto racing "fan," who views the sport in hopes of seeing a serious injury on the field or a fiery crash and death on the race track. Our political party system has degenerated in precisely the same manner.
Add to this the dangerous participation of a one-party, unchallenging, rubber stamp media, and full realization of what is meant by "despotic, out-of-control" government can be appreciated for the dangerous threat to individual freedom that it really represents. The precedent established by bad government will not be removed when another administration succeeds in power.
Political labels, excepting real and meaningful ones, such as socialist, communist, liberal [classical] and constitutionalist, are meaningless when used only to attack individuals or employed in normal competitive politics in a normal political environment. Our current political environment is anything but normal. Our political scene is exactly what it was in Hitler’s pre-WWII Germany, a contest between international communism and stateside fascism.
Labels can be good, but placing a label displaying the contents of yogurt on a container of rat poison isn’t. And a careful reading of that label won’t prevent disaster. ***
© 2002 Ted Lang
COPYRIGHT © 2002 BY THE AMERICAN PARTISAN. All writers retain rights to their work.