Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
If the goal is total control over the people I think you'd want them as fat and sickly diabetic as possible.
-spence
|
You don't seem to grasp the method toward "total" control of the people employed by "soft tyranny" or "soft despotism." A soft despot is one who believes he has the well-being of the people as his goal, but that the people do not know what is best for them. He must convince them that he knows best and should be trusted with their welfare more than they themselves. He does that with language, often Orwellian, more than with weapons. As Woodrow Wilson said in his "The Study of Administration":
"Whoever would
effect a change in a modern constitutional government must first educate his fellow-citizens to want
some change. That done,
he must persuade them to want the particular change he wants. He must first make public opinion willing to listen and
then see to it that it listen to the right things. He must stir it up to search for an opinion,
and then manage to put the right opinion it its way."
In America he must effect that change in its Constitution by transforming it from an immutable law that protects individual inalienable rights inherited by their nature and granted by nature's God, to a living and changeable system of government which grants those rights and without which there are no rights. And that government will be by men, not by law, and by men who are "experts," who will be the trustees and administrators of the good that will be regulated for and to the people.
And, as competent admistrators, the soft despots must not allow the people to become fat and diabetic, for that would create a financial, distributive, and moral burden on society, and especially on the administration. Limit and regulate the amount of fats and sugars in packaged foods, for instance, and regulate the size of soft drinks and tax and regulate destructive behaviour such as smoking, etc.
Threaded Mode