Dirty Hippies? Or the true, free mind of society?

While I’m sure there may be a few individuals here who were active hippies in the 60s…I wish to make my point anyway…I don’t intend to ostracize anyone, or make this a political statement…just make a point for everyone to think about while expressing my dilemmas with society.

 

Over the past 50 years, what has changed?

1960s, there was a high unemployment level; 2009, same thing

1960s, the Hippies were fighting to have the government listen to the demands of the people, and not demand that the people listen, 1970-80s, the Punks were fighting to have the government listen to the demands of the people, and not demand that the people listen, 2009, the people as a whole are fighting to have the government listen to the demands of the people, and not demand that the people listen….and in each case, with exception to the biggest and squeakiest wheels, the government does not listen. As far back as the creation of government with the nomadic tribes, those given the power quickly separate themselves from the people, and aside from issues of immediate survival, act as they want to, not how they should….so, do we elect people to represent us, or people to rule over us as though they were gods?

 

Look at those we elect…people who can buy their way onto the ticket, people who have millions of dollars, own businesses, make trades to ensure their popularity with the public…with few exceptions, we elect those who screw us to rule us. We elect those to office who have their (and their friends) best interest at heart with no connection to the common person…but what of the people? We elect those who promise to help the poor at the expense of the middle class, help the middle class at the expense of the rich, and help the rich by letting them screw the poor. We elect those who believe balance is keeping their finger on the scale as opposed to letting one or two pieces fall from the heavy side to allow balance to naturally occur.

 

A smaller government inspires balance, a massive government inspires control, regulation, and dictation. While each has their strong points, they both have just as prominent week points. A small government cannot regulate everything, so some pieces will fall from the scale. Thos pieces fall for the greater good, if a big enough piece falls, smaller pieces are inspired to grow, just as an old diseased tree falling, or a forest fire will bring about the growth of saplings on the forest floor...the old and diseased growth does not just disappear, it helps fertilize the new growth so the new trees can grow bigger and stronger than its predecessors, overcoming the disease that fell it’s elder.

 

A large government can keep the small pieces from falling from the scale, and help maintain balance as a big piece falls, until the smaller pieces can grow large enough to replace the lost weight ensuring that the loss to one side does not cause pieces to fall from the other.

 

 

But what of the public themselves, we blindly trust those who take control, we accept, or deny that what they do only has the intentions of helping or hurting with no middle ground, no concern for balance…but helping or hurting, a forced balance is an expensive time bomb left with the clock running, detonate it early, and the explosion will be small, let the clock count down to zero (or close to it) and the explosion will be great.…has this current time bomb gone off? Not yet. Things can become much worse, but only while we keep our finger on the scale…

 

So what to promote? Take one extreme, anarchy rules, all statuses reset, and the world plunges into chaos, only to find a balance, a balance that will inspire the growth of a government, inspiring the growth of a government, inspiring control, and regulation, and dictation….or take the other extreme, complete regulation, no freedom, no choice…force the balance hoping the laws of physics (society) will simply accept their fate…but eventually, the old tree will fall, no matter how much it is supported, and braced, the tree will fall under the stress of its own weight, crushing everything that has been built to support it. This will bring about chaos, war, famine, and anarchy…which will eventually find balance and start the entire cycle all over again. so do we detonate the time bomb early and take the loss? Do we let the counter run out and hope it is a dud? Or is there another option? Is this third option just another extreme, or is it a point somewhere between the two existing extremes?

 

Remember, the world does not exist in whole numbers, it does not exist in 2 dimensions, it does not follow the rules, the world is always the exception, always the unknown variable, always an ordered form of chaos, or a chaotic form of order.

 

 

 

Sorry for the long rant, but I’ve been working on this for several days, I wanted to truly express my dilemmas with the modern government in a way that doesn’t make me look like some crazy anarchist....or at least, not a crazy one.

 

Auto out-