The world has gone nuts. Or perhaps it always was, and just seems increasingly so. Or perhaps it is just our culture, suffering from the all too predictable consequences of relativism and progressive fantasies. Too dour? Perhaps. But if there is any truth to the old axiom "The road to hell is paved with good intentions," one only needs to look around or read the news to see the empirical data.
There is a piece on Ricochet.com this morning that illustrates what I, and I hope others, see.
Dave Carter, perhaps my favorite contributor on Ricochet, is a retired U.S. Air Force NCO and Senior Historian who now fills his days as a truck driver. I had the pleasure of meeting him some weeks ago and discovered that at one point in his career, his commanding officer happened to be a certain general that my dad had worked for with the 8th Air Force. (As an aside, in attendance at that meeting was his good friend Bob Lee, also an Air Force vet who happened to be stationed at Grand Forks the same time my family was there). At any rate, Dave is a fine fellow, and has a touch with words that I envy. At the bottom of this post, I link to a few other of my favorite Dave Carter posts.
But back to the point. Politicians at all levels like to experiment with new ideas and new policies, promising the world without ever truly counting the cost or the collateral damage. And rarely will anybody perform an honest assessment or audit of results that determines the policy was a bad idea. The answer is always more money or a new policy, not the termination or defunding of a bad one. Our representatives like to think that we always expect them to "do something." Frankly, I wish every now and then that they would "undo something" or "not do something".
Dave writes:
"We mean well but do ill, so we justify our ill-doing with our well-meaning," goes the saying I heard long ago. The idea that security can be achieved through the dismantlement of defenses in the face of gathering threats, the idea that national prosperity is to be found in the confiscation of capital from the productive sector, the idea that people will be happier and safer at city pools if only the distribution of life-saving resources mirrors the current ethnic nose-count, -- these are rank superstitions and would be laughable were it not for the human cost they impose. Does a drowning child wave for help only in Spanish? Can she be saved by a lifeguard who has, "a little bit of fear of the water," and, if not, will her family be comforted that she died while in the care of someone who at least had no "language issues"? If North Korea reduces Seoul to dust, will history record that, while over 10 million people perished, at least our failure to resolutely develop the necessary defensive capabilities was well intentioned rather than provocative? Does it matter to the American who just lost his job because his employer can't afford the demands of Obamacare, that the President's heart was ostensibly in the right place? Is the family traveling down the highway in something the size of a golf cart immune from the laws of physics by virtue of their compliance with ever-rising mandatory fuel standards?
Be sure to
read the whole thing.
We are (and have been) in an age of hyper-legislation, where our politicians are hyper-regulating, hyper-bloviating, hyper-infiltrating every facet of daily living. In a word, they're hyper. And they are ignoring the real and painful consequences of this progressive push to perdition. Will they, will we, ever come to our senses, and truly count the cost and weigh the consequences of our intentions? And whether, in fact, those intentions are even good at all?
I long for hope, but it seems to be in short supply, not unlike everything else these days.
If we suffer the foolish to lead us, we will reap the result of what they sow. Indeed, we already are.
A sampling of Dave's writing:
Life on the Move
Of Memories and Quiet Peace
Unsuitable to the American Palate
I encourage you to read them all.
