|14A008 Words They Never Used by Jim Davies, 5/6/2014
- government people, that is. They never said what's shown below; and that's the problem.
If they had, human beings would be vastly better off; but I tread a fine line here, for this Blog is about dispensing with government altogether, not with improving it. Let nobody take these remarks, therefore, to indicate that anything less than total abolition will do. We'll return to that later, but meanwhile take a look.
George III to Tom Jefferson, in 1776: "Very well, you may go. You want to cut yourself off from the finest Empire the world has known; so be it. Your taxes are cancelled, Our laws will no longer prevail, but you're on your own; We will not come to your aid, should hostile Frenchmen or Indians cause you trouble. Good bye and good luck."
Abe Lincoln to Jeff Davis, in 1861: "Strength comes from unity, but since you want out of this Union, who am I to stand in your way? We can still trade together, for mutual benefit."
Franz Josef to Peter I of Serbia, in 1914: "What, you prefer to align with Nicki II of Russia, rather than stay under Our Austrian umbrella? Okay, it's your country, your future. Best of luck to you. PS: would you care to purchase My Navy?"
Eduard Benes in 1938, to his ethnic German subjects in Czechoslovakia: "I understand, you prefer to join the Third Reich, with language and culture with which you're familiar. We'll be sorry to lose you, but I expect you'll have a bright future. 'Bye!"
Josef Beck in 1939, to his ethnic German subjects in Danzig, Poland: "It's true, you must feel a bit isolated from your countrymen. If you'd rather be part of Germany, that's quite okay - and we'll grant you the right of free travel along a connecting corridor. Auf Wiedersehen!"
Vincent Auriol to Ho Chi Min, in 1950: "It's been nice having you in our Empire, but if you now want to manage your own affairs without French help, that's fine. Au revoir!"
Arseny Yatsenyuk in 2014, to his ethnic Russian subjects in the East: "We'd really like to keep you, for you have some some of the best soil in Ukraine and the most fully developed industry. But if you like Putin that much, it's not for me to stop you doing as Crimea did. Do svidaniya; let's be good neighbors, and trade together!"
You can no doubt think of many other examples, but these few would have had a dramatic effect. Had such words been uttered, there would have been no Revolutionary War, no War to Prevent Secession, no First World War (and hence, no Communist Russia), no Second World War, no Vietnam War, and no current crisis in Ukraine, whose end result is still unknown. Many scores of millions of human lives would not have been wasted, and the human race would have progressed a great deal further.
All that, resulting simply from adherence to the principle of self determination.
Government people sometimes say they believe in that, but unless forced to do so (by an impossible task of repression as in the post-1945 breakup of the British Empire, or by defeat in war) these examples alone prove they do no such thing. Why not?
The answer is plain: to do so would be to act contrary to their very nature. Their nature is to govern. To govern is to dominate, to control, to exercise and enjoy power. That is their whole business. To surrender control, even in part, will never happen voluntarily and never has done. Added to that is the fact that a state of war (which can result from refusal to allow self determination) may actually enhance a government's power over its own people; war is, as Bourne observed, "the health of the State." So, once they grab a tax farm, they keep it. "Self determination" is an ideal politicians favor only when they are trying to do the grabbing.
The possibility of a government that cheerfully abandons a claim to sovereignty merely because its subects want that is, accordingly, a myth. The choice is only between one that governs without limit, or one that doesn't exist. This Blog favors the latter, and the way to achieve it is presented here.