We have more in common with Russia than you think
Jackson says that when freedom is threatened, anarchy can’t be far be-hind.
By Raynard Jackson
(NNPA Newswire Columnist)
Last month I wrote a column titled, “Russia Is Winning the War for American Minds.” In that piece, I discussed how Russia had unleashed a psychological operations program in the U.S. to destabilize our government and our various institutions; they have been phenomenally successful with their operation.
As I continued to ponder this Russian operation in the U.S., I have begun to wonder: are we, too, becoming more and more like Russia without even knowing it?
Dissent in either country is no longer tolerated.
In both countries, the central government wants to control every aspect of life, both private and public.
In both countries, the central government wants to control the means of production, i.e. business.
So, like in the communist days of old, no dissent, government control, and central planning are the themes of the day.
Just think, if you happen to believe that a boy born with male genitalia should actually be expected to go to the boy’s bathroom, you are considered hateful and discriminatory. If you happen to hold to the “radical” notion that homosexuality is morally wrong, you are forced to kneel before the altar of political correctness (PC) until you recant.
When freedom is threatened, anarchy can’t be far behind.
In both countries, the government is increasingly controlling more and more of how private companies operate through onerous regulations.
Now, some lawmakers want to mandate how much small businesses pay their employees, what products or services you can make or provide, the type of bathrooms you must provide, and how much profit they will allow you to make via the tax code.
In both countries, the government plans your life from cradle to grave. In the U.S., half of all births are paid for by the government through Medicaid. Now the government wants to take over our health insurance, which is one seventh of our economy.
The government is far too involved in far too many aspects of our lives. The government has absolutely no business paying for healthy people to have babies. None.
How about this novel concept: if you can’t financially afford to have a child, then keep your legs closed!
Yeah, I said it. And I will not recant at the altar of political correctness.
Compassion should not be measured by how many government programs we create, but rather by how few Americans actually need them.
It’s unsettling that the very people who benefit from the largess of our government have the gall to get angry when Republicans want to mandate that in exchange for the government benefits, they would have to work a certain number of hours per week.
Our government has become our drug dealer. The government knows we are hooked on the drug of government dependency, and with this knowledge, they seek to manipulate and control us.
Isn’t it amazing that the more we come to distrust our institutions, the more the government seems to inject themselves into our lives?
The government has absolutely no right mandating family leave, maternity, paternity leave or things of the sort. These things sound good on the surface, but this is not the job of the government.
A woman choosing to have a baby is a private matter and if she can’t afford to take time off to raise a child, then maybe she should delay starting a family until such time as she can financially to do so.
So, the more the government is involved in our lives, the more control they have over our lives; the more control they have, the more they will attempt to dictate our values by promoting constructs like homosexuality, transsexual entitlements, and secularism.
Russia is, without question, run by a pseudo autocrat, Vladimir Putin. Yes, they have “democratic” elections, but no one in their right minds would view Russian elections as free and fair.
I do not argue that Russia is the cause of our distrust, but I think it is quite obvious that they have sped it up considerably; Putin put our distrust of government on steroids.
So, in theory, I think that President Trump’s recently submitted budget proposal is on point. One could argue about the deep cuts he is proposing, but if you believe in freedom and liberty, you can’t argue with the intent of his budget—to shrink the size and power of the U.S. government in our daily lives.
The only way to begin to restore faith in our government institutions is by decreasing their influence over our lives. Isn’t it amazing that the last two, great economic periods in our country were under Presidents Reagan and Clinton?
What do these two presidents have in common? They both presided over White Houses that were focused on shrinking the size of government.