By Nathan Barton
A commentary by Thomas Ascik, on CNS News, bemoans that five states are voting on outright legalizing cannabis for any use (including recreational) during this year’s election. He apparently attributes it, together with five more states voting on legalizing what he scoffs as “medical” use of cannabis, to the increasing stupidity of Americans in general and of government officials (although he doesn’t come right out and state it). His arguments sound reasonable and logical until you read the part about federal agencies “maintaining their integrity” and get to the end where you find he is a retired federal prosecutor.
Are we dumbing down America? Just who is “we?” Government DOES seem intent on doing so. But the recent reversal in public opinion on the use of cannabis – especially when compared in effect and history to the use of beverage alcohol and tobacco of all types – suggests rather, that Americans are getting smarter in some ways.
Indeed, it seems that Americans, after decades or more than a century of being “dumbed down” enough to believe government is (a) good for you and (b) telling you the truth, are now getting smart enough to at least question both of these things. Things which have been demonstrated time and time again for a century and more, to be completely false.
Let me restate that to be clear. Government lies. Whether government lies 10% or 90% or 50% of the time is a moot point: it cannot be trusted at ANY time to tell the truth. Even when it would seemingly be in its own best interested to do so.
And government is NOT good for us – or virtually anyone. It is not just the despotisms of the past, whether we are talking Louis XVI’s or Benito Mussolini’s or Adolf Hitler’s or Mao’s or Saddam’s regime, that have killed millions of their own citizens and millions more of the subjects of other governments: the FedGov has and continues to kill our own people as well as people from virtually every other nation on earth. On a daily basis. And mistreat people of all groups and classes (except maybe that 1/2 of 1 % that is the “ruling class,” maybe) in every imaginable way. While at the same time stealing us blind, damaging our economies, wrecking our families, and creating a mess when we should be living in the best of times.
I am NO supporter of recreational drugs – I did not light up a roach when in Colorado after it legalized it, and would not do that in South Dakota when even this state finally does it – or collapses so that there is no one to enforce the drug or other laws. I am no supporter or user of tobacco or booze (not even beer or wine), and I am not sure that even if medical cannabis were the best solution for a medical problem that I could get myself to use it.
Nor am I any fan of hippies, potheads, drug addicts, drug dealers (or for that matter liquor stores or smoke shops) or the like. I will do all I can, morally, to help someone break an addiction, whether it is to drugs (including tobacco and beer – yes, beer) or gambling or anything else. Because…
I am a lover and supporter of liberty: of God-given liberty. And as more and more people get smarter about government, and come to realize that the excuses for the laws (unconstitutional that they are) that outlawed marijuana and so many other things) were and are nothing but government lies – and lies by businesses and those interested in increasing the power of government – the more they realize what liberty they have lost. And the more likely they are to take the actions necessary to regain that liberty.
It should not surprise you that of 16 comments on this man’s commentary on CNS News – a CONSERVATIVE news and opinion site – only ONE sarcastically supported his point of view. People ARE learning.
Now, if only more Americans could become smarter about other things. Like the people who run for office. And how to do their jobs and take responsibility for their own actions.
The Price of Liberty 
Further, to argue that the mere presence of government is a vehicle to foment corruption is akin to arguing that the existence of air is to encourage the pollution of the air; except for the presence of air there would be no pollution. The presence of life incites death, goodness provokes wickedness, ad nauseam.
In their brilliance, the Founders intended a limited government. Let us get back to that. However, you seem to argue opposed even to that. (Yes, I do hold hope of that. O, let me tell you of the immense hope I possess.) It would be terribly crass of me to suggest if you don’t like it, then move. Try as I might I am unable to conjure a different resolution. I do realize that perhaps is my shortcoming.
LikeLike
Sorry, but that’s BS as far as I’m concerned. I choose freedom. And how do you have any authority to tell me to move because you want someone or something to control my life? Wouldn’t it benefit both of us to simply mind our own business and trade in peace? Why do you need the force of government?
LikeLike
Nay, our differing perspectives are not limited to the practical application. Mama has argued that since there is no provision to opt out, that government is morally not justified. Try as I might, I simply cannot get my head around that, that is to say I cannot agree.
I should think that to live unfettered of the avarice and duplicity of government is the desire of every person. Yet that is an indictment of those vile persons in government but not of government itself.
LikeLike
Except, Richard, it is not possible for some people to control other people, against their will, without force, fraud/lies and theft.
Show me a non-voluntary government that was compatible with individual liberty and real justice? What is the purpose of a non-voluntary government but to control the people and their property for someone else’s benefit? If YOU need someone else to control your affairs and property, hire a lawyer or management firm. Leave me out of it.
LikeLike
It occurs to me that yours and mine definition of government are different. At least, in the practical application thereof.
Consider a governor on an engine, or familiar to me, a governor on an aircraft propeller. If one were to consider that an internal combustion engine is trying to tear itself apart, it should be agreed that these devices are an aid to prevent the inevitable from instigating a catastrophe. This very same consideration is the basis of the government handed down to us.
Of course, when that device, or that body of elected (or appointed) persons, becomes weakened, or dissolved into corruption, or extends itself beyond it’s original intent, it shall dutifully be replaced.
I do share your contempt and disdain for our government but only when it is corrupted from the original intent.
LikeLike
The only thing that matters to me is whether the “government” is individually voluntary or not. If the association or government I live with is completely voluntary, no problem. The non-voluntary government serves no purpose compatible with individual liberty or justice. It really is that simple.
And a “governor” on an inanimate object is comparing apples to rocks.
LikeLike
The original “intent” was to set up the whole country as a plantation of slaves for the “rulers” to plunder at will. They came to that (the present) by small steps, but that was always the intent.
LikeLike