WorldNetDaily
Monday, October 30, 2000
BETWEEN THE LINES
Living in an age of unreality
by Joseph Farah
ST. LOUIS, Mo. -- Aldous Huxley said it best 56 years ago: "A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude. To make them love it is the task assigned, in present totalitarian states, to ministries of propaganda, newspaper editors and schoolteachers. But their methods are still crude and unscientific."
That was certainly true 56 years ago. Today, I would suggest, the biggest change is that the methods are less crude, more scientific.
In fact, America is moving closer to totalitarianism and servitude -- and most people don't even recognize it, let alone need to be coerced.
"What are you talking about, Farah?" I hear some of you saying. "We're in the midst of a spirited presidential election cycle in America. How can you say we're not free and moving toward dictatorship?"
The sorry state of the presidential debate is a case in point. Both of the two major candidates are running campaigns calling for increased federal government spending and, thus, more intrusion in and regulation of the lives of individual Americans.
Vice President Al Gore makes no bones about what he wants -- he would like to micro-manage every facet of American life. Gov. George W. Bush, on the other hand, pays lip service to limited government, but his programs betray the rhetoric.
Social Security is a hopeless Ponzi scheme that takes far more money from people than it returns. But neither of the viable candidates dares tell the public that the emperor has no clothes. That would be "political suicide," the consultants and polls show. Therefore, no debate on the merits of Social Security takes place.
Medicare is another bureaucratic mess. But does anyone call a spade a spade? Not a chance. Don't want to risk losing the senior citizen vote.
The federal government has no business at all in education. Washington has already made a bloody mess of school policy. But both major candidates would spend more on it and get Washington even deeper into a command-and-control, one-size-fits-all, top-down form of management. To hell with the Constitution!
Even a program as fraudulent, unnecessary and un-American as the National Endowment for the Arts is a non-starter in this campaign, just as it has been with the Republican Congress that has voted it budget increases every year since 1994.
I met over the weekend here with a group of doctors, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. These people understand what government intrusion has meant to health care in this country. And with either of the leading candidates, it's bound to get worse.
Many of these doctors are opting out of the Medicare system -- not because they don't want to treat the poor, but because of the inefficiency, red tape, government snooping and blatant illegality of it all.
Some of these doctors treat their poor patients for free, rather than get involved with Medicare. But nobody in politics or the media establishment seems to hear their concerns, their anguish, their common-sense analysis of what is truly wrong with our health-care system.
What's wrong with it is there's too much government involvement now. And Washington's prescription is more involvement, more regulation, more control.
This is not an accident. I don't believe most politicians in Washington are stupid. They have an agenda. And that agenda is, in a word, "power."
The debate is rigged. It's not really a debate at all. The ground rules don't permit the introduction of real controversy, root problems and meaningful questions.
Huxley saw through it 56 years ago when he looked at the totalitarian regimes of his day. The methods were crude and unscientific. They've become more perfected.
The schools and the newspapers now serve the state blindly just as the old propaganda ministries once did.
Are we there yet? Have we reached our destination on the road to totalitarianism and servitude? If not, we're well on our way.
And, given the Orwellian state of the presidential debate in this age of unreality, we're sure to be a step or two closer come Jan. 20, 2001.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_btl/20001030_xcbtl_living_an_.shtml
Monday, October 30, 2000
BETWEEN THE LINES
Living in an age of unreality
by Joseph Farah
ST. LOUIS, Mo. -- Aldous Huxley said it best 56 years ago: "A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude. To make them love it is the task assigned, in present totalitarian states, to ministries of propaganda, newspaper editors and schoolteachers. But their methods are still crude and unscientific."
That was certainly true 56 years ago. Today, I would suggest, the biggest change is that the methods are less crude, more scientific.
In fact, America is moving closer to totalitarianism and servitude -- and most people don't even recognize it, let alone need to be coerced.
"What are you talking about, Farah?" I hear some of you saying. "We're in the midst of a spirited presidential election cycle in America. How can you say we're not free and moving toward dictatorship?"
The sorry state of the presidential debate is a case in point. Both of the two major candidates are running campaigns calling for increased federal government spending and, thus, more intrusion in and regulation of the lives of individual Americans.
Vice President Al Gore makes no bones about what he wants -- he would like to micro-manage every facet of American life. Gov. George W. Bush, on the other hand, pays lip service to limited government, but his programs betray the rhetoric.
Social Security is a hopeless Ponzi scheme that takes far more money from people than it returns. But neither of the viable candidates dares tell the public that the emperor has no clothes. That would be "political suicide," the consultants and polls show. Therefore, no debate on the merits of Social Security takes place.
Medicare is another bureaucratic mess. But does anyone call a spade a spade? Not a chance. Don't want to risk losing the senior citizen vote.
The federal government has no business at all in education. Washington has already made a bloody mess of school policy. But both major candidates would spend more on it and get Washington even deeper into a command-and-control, one-size-fits-all, top-down form of management. To hell with the Constitution!
Even a program as fraudulent, unnecessary and un-American as the National Endowment for the Arts is a non-starter in this campaign, just as it has been with the Republican Congress that has voted it budget increases every year since 1994.
I met over the weekend here with a group of doctors, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. These people understand what government intrusion has meant to health care in this country. And with either of the leading candidates, it's bound to get worse.
Many of these doctors are opting out of the Medicare system -- not because they don't want to treat the poor, but because of the inefficiency, red tape, government snooping and blatant illegality of it all.
Some of these doctors treat their poor patients for free, rather than get involved with Medicare. But nobody in politics or the media establishment seems to hear their concerns, their anguish, their common-sense analysis of what is truly wrong with our health-care system.
What's wrong with it is there's too much government involvement now. And Washington's prescription is more involvement, more regulation, more control.
This is not an accident. I don't believe most politicians in Washington are stupid. They have an agenda. And that agenda is, in a word, "power."
The debate is rigged. It's not really a debate at all. The ground rules don't permit the introduction of real controversy, root problems and meaningful questions.
Huxley saw through it 56 years ago when he looked at the totalitarian regimes of his day. The methods were crude and unscientific. They've become more perfected.
The schools and the newspapers now serve the state blindly just as the old propaganda ministries once did.
Are we there yet? Have we reached our destination on the road to totalitarianism and servitude? If not, we're well on our way.
And, given the Orwellian state of the presidential debate in this age of unreality, we're sure to be a step or two closer come Jan. 20, 2001.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_btl/20001030_xcbtl_living_an_.shtml
