View RSS Feed


In Defense of "Sheep" and Big Government -- Anarcho-Fascism Introduction

Rating: 3 votes, 2.67 average.
For those unaware, the term "sheep" (along with variations like "sheeople") refers to a person who follows authority (government) without question, no matter how ridiculous the command. Many who advocate minimal (or no) government blame "sheep" for having allowed the US Government (USG) to expand into the bloated, unconstitutional bureaucracy advocates of small government now rail against. However, I'm going to suggest that sheep, conscious or otherwise, are, like Barack Obama and George Bush, the greatest catalysts for liberty in a time when the USG nears economic ruin.

There would be no libertarian/conservative anger if there were not an oppressive federal government. What would be the motivation to stand in the streets, write letters, and engage in other forms of political activism if there were no target? The Tea Party is an angry mob of small government activists who have railed against legislators of big government (with a seeming bias against liberals) - but they would not have formed were it not for the increasing power of government, with enormous debt increases and unprecedented government expenditure increases by President Obama. The hostility at the Obamacare town hall meetings would not have occurred if people were not angry at government growth. The influence of libertarian activist Lysander Spooner would likely have been much less if he were not augmented with rage by unjust government intrusions on his business ventures. Most recently, 4Chan cyber-assaulted corporations which denied services to Julian Assange at the request of US Senator Joe Lieberman.

These people would not even be a footnote in history if it were not for politicians who seek to expand government and the "sheep" who go along with politicians for the calm, collected tone they maintain while reading from a teleprompter. There would be no EFF, Tea Party, "Operation Payback," or American Revolution if it were not for oppressive government policies.

You may see this as a silly argument with convoluted logic (because obviously, if there is nothing for libertarians to complain of, well.... what's the problem?) until you realize the USG is closer than ever to financial collapse. "Too big to fail" has become a phrase every American is familiar with, but Americans will soon have to come to understand a new phrase; "too big not to fail." The EU itself is in crisis -- there's nobody left to bail out the US - and why would they want to? As China continues its attempts to become self-sufficient by improving internal infrastructure, their interest in continuing to subsidize the US with investment and debt financing will dry up. This theory is even more plausible considering the USG's economy continues digging itself a deeper hole of debt, with no indication legislators are interested in balancing the government budget. The US national debt has exceeded $13.75 trillion, with an annual deficit of over $1.33 trillion. That makes the total debt/GDP nearly 95% (over 10% annually). At peak of crisis, Greece had an annual debt/GDP of ~15%, total @ ~125%. Including unfunded social welfare obligations, the US debt is near $50 trillion.

Yet, the government refuses to make significant tax increases or reduce expenditure. Federal programs such as the federal food stamps program (recently updated to "SNAP") have been taking steps toward increasing participation in welfare programs.

Government legislators know how easy it would be to solve the government's financial dysfunction, but it is the sheep who, with politicians' malicious shepherding, prevent these necessary reforms from taking place. When a group of legislators begin to push responsible reform, it is met with an opposing group using fluff sound-bytes as "seniors/teachers/YOU deserve better" or "Senator Joe Responsible just doesn't get it" to win over the "sheep," and they generally succeed in stopping reform - and when they don't, the "sheep" rise up angrily as was done by UK students after their government found itself unable to subsidize college tuition at current levels.

However, there are a couple forces which will bring in an era of freedom which many advocates of small government insist on fighting against. Ron Paul recently noted "the Fed will end itself before Im able to do it," and I believe he's right. People are waking up due to short-sighted and corrupt policies of the federal government being so clearly ridiculous that they're shaken from docile conformity and forced to begin questioning everything the government does. At the same time, the government's own ridiculous policies are bringing them to ruin because politicians, instead of enacting responsible reform, continue with short-sighted policies, whether unfair targeted subsidization or broad domestic welfare, to bring those voters to the polls.

Advocates of small government should work with these forces and push government into collapse by simply having faith in their principles. As time goes on, the US citizenry will continue making realizations that the government is responsible for its own woes and their regulations are not only inconvenient, but ultimately harmful. I suggest a "bipolar" approach to politics, similar to how many politicians happen to currently operate: we speak in favor of responsible reform, but in action, vote against those reforms. We take welfare, don't provide tax revenue, but still rail against big government in text and speech. Our personal financial statuses will be better for it, and if our theories are true, we will see a future with a new, much smaller government, with little trust from its citizens or foreigners to be given much power/debt. I do not know specifically how it will play out, but I know a government distrusted by its citizens is preferable to our current government.

Rise up and EMPOWER the State!

Updated 03-17-2011 at 08:19 PM by Kludge

Anarcho-Fascism , ؎Politics


  1. heavenlyboy34's Avatar
    If your theory is right, then nobody has to vote, participate in activism, educate, etc. The government would just collapse upon itself like the Roman Empire. Seems like it has historical precedent, so you may well be right. But at the present time, it would be preferable to maintain distance from the regime while it is destroying itself.