We're From The Government. We Know What's Best For You.

Print This Post

You may also like...

17 Responses

  1. Joe says:

    I would so vote for you to hold a seat in any office.

  2. Richard Brackett says:

    We're just screwed…

    All this control infrastructure being setup and our recognized political parties are just fighting over who gets to drive it.

    I frequently argue with nanny types that once you permit those controls you are at the whim of the powers that be, and sooner or later YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE THAT POWER and then you'll get to reap the whirlwind.

  3. MadRocketScientist says:

    Hear Hear!

  4. Chris Berez says:

    Well said, Ken. Well said.

  5. wilhelm2451 says:

    Different "sides" of the same ill-minted coin, but here, here! I've not seen the two extremes pulled together and painted with the same brush so well in a long time.

  6. Ken, this was brilliant. You've stated very eloquently what I've been struggling to put into words for quite a while.

  7. Grandy says:

    I understand the urge to have something like a pet ferret, but like with smoking, it’s an understandable urge that probably is best not indulged.

    Kodo and Podo would have to have a word with Ms. Marcotte.

  8. mojo says:

    Send not, therefore, to as for whom the bell tolls.

  9. Charles says:

    The best thing to come out of all of this is that we now know that Amanda Marcotte shares Rudy Giuliani's anti-ferret bias.

  10. Jonathan C. Hansen says:

    Hey – very well put. It astonishes me that many, if not most, people cannot deduce this tautology about big government themselves. Maybe people today are too distracted with the plethora of amazing toys and pastimes provided by the advance of science and technology to even think about this issue. But clearly those that wrote the Constitution had this foremost in mind. Pointing this out can only be good, but it would be far better if the average citizen could figure it out him/herself.

  11. Imaginary Lawyer says:

    Ken, nobody could argue with a straight face that SF isn't batshit crazy in so many ways, but your article is a bit disingenuous. You make it sound as though the SF city government was of one unified, crystal-hugging, hippie-dippy mind and everybody happily agreed to all those proposals, when in fact there's a huge amount of contention in city politics, and "proposal" doesn't mean "had a snowball's chance of actually happening".

    Not to mention that rules about what the city can and cannot do are very different than rules that apply to private citizens. Nobody is trying to keep your convenience store from selling Pepsi or bottled water.

  12. Ken says:

    IL, no doubt there's a difference between banning a practice on city property and banning it outright. But the difference is an incremental one, and regulating things on city property is a first step, one fraught with an attitude about the respective roles of government and citizens. That's my point.

    As to the snowball's chance — it's my understanding that the pet store proposal (which, after all, would directly impact a few business owners and their customers) was considered at a contentious hearing and not yet rejected, but continued to the next hearing. I don't know the status of the one banning bottled water (and the news reports aren't completely clear if that just means banning the sales of it, or what).

  1. July 13, 2010

    [...] The source ideology is not relevant. [...]

  2. July 14, 2010

    [...] Ken (at Popehat) absolutely nails it. [O]ne of the chief frustrations of being libertarian-leaning is the feeling that mainstream politics offers us a choice between one party’s socially conservative totalitarianism and the other party’s social engineering totalitarianism. Each party constantly rails against the other party’s excesses, but indulges in its own, utterly failing to grasp this: giving the government power to do things you like naturally tends to give it power to do things you don’t like. So liberals cheerfully advocate heavy regulation of our economic lives, not grasping that it tends to empower the government to control our moral lives, and conservatives eagerly advocate increased morals laws and law enforcement power, not grasping that these tend to empower the government to regulate the living shit out of their businesses. [...]

  3. July 15, 2010

    [...] interested in telling people "do this or else." As the folks at Popehat pointed out in THIS post. The key [...]