One Percent

Column by Alex R. Knight III.

Exclusive to STR

Senator Rand Paul, son of the infamous quasi-libertarian ex-congressman Ron Paul, recently brought a proposal before the governmental body of which he is a member. It moved that – other than the sacred cow of so-called “Social Security”– one percent (1%) of all other fedgov spending, right across the board be cut. That's one percent. Just one penny out of every confiscated federal tax dollar. One cent. No more.

It likely will not surprise anyone reading this that the measure did not pass. No Democrats – those heroes always allegedly fighting for the working class – were in support of it, and fewer than half of the supposedly less government, lower taxes Republicans voted with Paul. We're talking about one percent of spending. An amount that would in practice produce virtually no noticeable effect whatsoever in terms of government reduction. Just 21 members of a 100 member clique thought it might be permissible to trim a mere $30 billion out of a roughly $3 trillion budget to fund government. And that's just for one lousy year.

Is there anyone prepared to seriously continue pretending that those calling themselves government “work for us,” or in any way love “our country”? 

The National Debt– the amount the people in government have borrowed out of thin air from the counterfeiters known as central banks and are charging usfor via taxation – is now well over $21 trillion and rising at all times.

Roughly 2.3 million people are incarceratedin America. If we include all the people on parole or probation, that figure inflates to aroundseven million people. A constitution allegedly created to produce the smallest, least intrusive government in history has in practice spawned the most massive and expensive behemoth the world has ever seen, with the greatest number of laws on the books, and more wars and conflicts around the globe than any other.

The failure of this experiment in “limited government” – the absurd supposition that bureaucrats can be restrained by words on pieces of paper – is now long since both flagrantly obvious and undeniable.

And yet when we talk about one percent, that is maybe – maybe – the percentage of Americans who can actually see this situation for what it is and know that the sole solution is not any kind of “reform” (which is essentially always in flux in some capacity anyway, and to no real ultimate benefit), but a total end and cessation of the State Concept and model altogether.

But that is not enough to tip the apple cart. It's not even close, in fact. And on all fronts, time is running out as the last vestiges of freedom and autonomy fade away, and the tentacles of government find their way into the very last vacant niches of human liberty.

Solutions? You can peruse through my archives for a few suggestions I've advanced here and there in the past. Voting is certainly not among them. 

I'm not writing this with any kind of a cure in mind this time around, I'm afraid. Just a sense of warning for what is to come. For the one percent. That's not a reference to any group of ultra-rich globalist nabobs, mind you, but to the small minority out there who are already awake and listening. Call it preaching to the choir if you like. 

But I don't hear much singing – especially not over the constant cacophonous din of shrill screams for ever more government control in every area of life.

For now, at least, there are simply too few of us.

That must change. Or humanity will die as slaves who foolishly forged their very own chains.

Your rating: None Average: 9 (1 vote)
Alex R. Knight III's picture
Columns on STR: 153

Alex R. Knight III is the author of numerous horror, science-fiction, and fantasy tales.  He has also written and published poetry, non-fiction articles, reviews, and essays for a variety of venues.  He currently lives and writes in rural southern Vermont where he holds a B.A. in Literature & Writing from Union Institute & University.  Alex's Amazon page can be found here, and his work may also be found at both Smashwords and Barnes & Noble.  His MeWe group can be found here.


Samarami's picture

Nice to see you back "on board", Alex. And interesting topic.

I've been re-reading our old friend, Delmar England (died 2010, per Per Bylund), "Mind and Matters, The World in a Mirror".

Here's a prefacing quote from Chapter 8:

    "...To speak of a governmental system is to speak of a specific segment of earth wherein the inhabitants are controlled by a certain person or persons. The segment, always established by physical force, is usually called a country or nation. The primary philosophy is physical dominance. The will to power is an insatiable appetite and those controlling each segment are forever fearful for their “security”. Every alliance of two or more segments is seen as a threat. Counter alliances and weapons buildup are necessary precautions that instills fear and insecurity in others. This fuse is always burning, sometimes slowly, sometimes swiftly, but always the psychological condition of escalation is present and operating..."

He goes on to outline the reality that there is no such thing as "reducing government":

    "...So, let us be clear from the outset. When someone seeks to control, limit, or reduce government, what they are clearly saying is that they wish to direct the centralized coercive force to compel all others to conform to their personal values, to act for their personal benefit, i.e., to claim ownership of all other individuals..."

The Paul of the world may appear to mean well. But the phenomenon we like to call "government" will never be anything other than coercion and violence and war. Sam

Alex R. Knight III's picture

Hi Sam, good to hear from you again, in turn!  :-)
I would hope that I made clear in this short piece that I'm entirely in accord with everything you and the late Mr. England have to say above.  My purpose was to draw a stark illustration for the fence-sitters, while addressing the initiated also.

Mark Davis's picture

One-percent is likely a high estimate, IMHO. My expectations of a general awakening to the joys and benefits of liberty, much less a rejection of the state, decline daily. The ability to think abstractly does not appear to be a common trait while the desire for tangible, immediate results appears overwhelming to the few who can and do. As long as the median time preference for the general population is a matter of days, weeks or even months as opposed to years, or preferably decades, the dominate social order will be based on obedience, compulsion and violence. Our best hope for a voluntary society free of this statist cult is a remnant of liberty-lovers surviving the predictable collapse of the existing order. Keep preaching to the choir, Alex, because the size of this remnant will be important in determining the structural design of future reboots of the social order.

Alex R. Knight III's picture

I concur, Mark.  Instant gratification is the touchstone concept of modern society.  I also think you make a salient point in your conclusion.  Thanks for your perspective.

D. Saul Weiner's picture

A 1% reduction in spending, however inadequate, is not politically acceptable, probably for a couple reasons.

First, if it were to happen and business would go on as usual, it would beg the question "Maybe we can cut the budget by 5% or 10%, or even more, without adverse consequences". And that is not a thought that the political class wants people to entertain.

Second, and probably more importantly, in the political world, the laws of economics have (apparently) been suspended. We can have our cake and eat it too. There is no real awareness about what all of this runaway spending is REALLY costing us (i.e. in terms of opportunity cost). That will change eventually, but in the interim an incredible amount of damage is being done. There is no real incentive for politicians to be more fiscally responsible: quite the contrary.

Alex R. Knight III's picture

Great points, all.