Authored by William Robert Barber
In the beginning, before attorneys, respect was earned by savvy performance. A clan member’s credibility was inextricably tied to that person’s aptitude, physical skill, and sagacious conduct. The subjective and relative aspects of life were nonexistent or blatantly ignored in favor of attending to the undeniably difficult challenges of living. There was very little bullshit… remembering, it was before there were any attorneys. An individual earned their keep; family was the only, albeit limited of entitlements. One of the most prestigious of values was to attain – by individual merit – the respect of family and clan. All was brutal, but naturally bona fide by an inherent truthfulness of purpose.
My assumption is that one fine day the strongest of the clan decided that it was in his specific interest to improve his position. Gathering his acolytes, he plotted and planned. In the first cause he guilefully (indication that this was the first attorney) put forth the argument that enhancing his specific interest was actually an embrace of everyone’s interest. In the second cause he offered with clear disambiguation the certainty of coercive reprisal to anyone thinking anything other than conformity to his will. He noted, after preemptively eliminating those that might contest his will, that all members owe fidelity to his leadership. Indeed, his governess required obedience and such obedience was indistinguishable from fidelity to the clan.
Once assured of overwhelming power, he ordained a government and had that government declare that henceforth, a percentage of each clan member’s production and service would be pledged to the clan’s government or its designates. Everyone agreed — that is, until they disagreed. And from that period on, the governing of the clan by the ‘connected,’ supported by the utility of taxation and the omnipotence of coerciveness, has been a contestable factor of consternation.
Obviously, a robber baron (the government) would remain poor and ordinary if he robbed only from the economically disadvantageous. The objective of any robber baron is to rob from the wealthy. In order to rob from the wealthy (more than just once), the baron must devise a plan of/for complicit compliance. In other words, the wealthy must, by some agreement of understanding, be in general compliance to be robbed.
Initially the governed were willing to cede a portion of their monies for protection; of course the first payment of protection was paid to the robber baron. Once the ongoing payment percentage was agreed upon and the wealthy satisfied, persons and institutions within the wealthy lobbied the robber baron for exceptions and other considerations. The robber baron, recognizing the value, willful complicity, encouraged such exceptions and considerations; hence the invention of statutory corruption and need for political parties.
The wealthy, noting the constancy of economic change prompted by an ever changing world, looked to encumber by pecuniary means the not as wealthy, even the more than simply poor, to share in the payments to robber baron. Therefore, as the serf evolved from indentured to ownership, Gutenberg’s technology circulated, gun power applied, the bible translated into English, the steam engine having transformed transportation, and literacy booming, the not quite as wealthy grew from a few to a multitude. The peoples of Europe, as if flamed by a catalyst of kinetic energy, sprung into a society of skilled labor, guilds, merchants, traders, lawyers, and practitioners of government service. In short order they shared in the monetary burden of supporting the robber baron; indeed, many even unseated the robber baron for their own sake.
The contesting, the mix of various persuasions between and amongst the influential, the wealthy, the almost wealthy, and the less than wealthy from within and without, continues. The fight is over the general public’s heart, mind, and most importantly cash. However, in the dynamics of today, a person’s credibility versus the clan’s mores, a person is not inextricably tethered to sagacious conduct or to a willful tenacity for the individual to earn by performance the respect of society. In the politics of today the measure of dynamic, positive governing has more to do with money raised, the cajoling of required elements and supportive variables by means inclusive of extralegal; to many politicians, the winning includes a service to a political ideology irrespective of constitutional scofflaw or truthfulness.
For the many professional politicians, the paid executives of political parties and their cadre of non-elected, America is no longer the land of the free and the home of the brave. For these servitors of the robber baron, America is simply a contest between red and blue.
The robber baron has (per regulations, fees, and taxes) subjected the meaningful essence of private enterprise to the whim of his appointed hierarchy. Within the hubris of purposefully created government ambiguity, congress has outdone itself in the recently legislated documents that in its befuddlement rival the U.S. Tax Code. Elected representatives do not read the very legislation they vote on, contemplation of legislative effects is almost nonexistent, politicians willfully distort, the medium is bias, and attorneys have overrun congress… Only the people can change all of the above; the next two national elections maybe the most important in this nation’s history. Liberal progressivism must be soundly defeated if America was ever to be restored as the exception amongst nation states.