Why Are Almost All Congress Members Statists?

[anaconda]

I don't mean to use a non sequitur because if they are in Congress, they are by definition "statists" to a degree.

You see, I would expect members of Congress to be elected with local special interest money. Like maybe some rich real estate developer wants some legislation passed that that will help him with his business in his local congressional district. That would explain that particular Representative's priorities.

But what I don't understand is why they all vote for wars and the police state. I mean, are the bankers and the military secretly giving money to every member of Congress? If so, why haven't I heard of one single book by a former Congressional member exposing this money trail? Something doesn't add up for me. All around me I see evidence of a growing New World Order Conspiracy, but I don't see any direct evidence linking all of Congress. I see direct evidence for some members of Congress, but far from all.

I'm trying to see if and how the NWO agenda trickles down to individual legislators. Anyone have any ideas?

[noneedtoaggress]

Politics is power games.

Introduction

[U]nder the predominance of interventionist ideas, a political
career is open only to men who identify themselves with the
interests of a pressure group. . . . Service to the short-run interests
of a pressure group is not conducive to the development of those
qualities which make a great statesman. Statesmanship is invariably
long-run policy; pressure groups do not bother about the
long-run.1

I decided to run for Congress because of the disaster of wage and
price controls imposed by the Nixon administration in 1971. When the
stock market responded euphorically to the imposition of these controls
and the closing of the gold window, and the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce and many other big business groups gave enthusiastic
support, I decided that someone in politics had to condemn the controls,
and offer the alternative that could explain the past and give
hope for the future: the Austrian economists’ defense of the free market.
At the time I was convinced, like Ludwig von Mises, that no one
could succeed in politics without serving the special interests of some
politically powerful pressure group.
Although I was eventually elected, in terms of a conventional political
career with real Washington impact, he was absolutely right. I
have not developed legislative influence with the leadership of the
Congress or the administration. Monies are deliberately deleted from
routine water works bills for my district because I do not condone the
system, nor vote for any of the appropriations.
My influence, such as it is, comes only by educating others about
the rightness of the free market. The majority of the voters in my district
have approved, as have those familiar with free-market economics.
And voters in other districts, encouraged by my speaking out for
freedom and sound money, influence their representatives in the
direction of a free market. My influence comes through education, not
the usual techniques of a politician. But the more usual politicians in
Congress will hardly solve our problems. Americans need a better
understanding of Austrian economics. Only then will politicians
become more statesmanlike.

http://mises.org/books/paulmises.pdf

[anaconda]

Politics is power games.

http://mises.org/books/paulmises.pdf

But the NWO agenda seems quite long term. It has been many many decades of incremental and patient fruition. Your quote implies the opposite - that non statesmen are only short-term legislators.

[noneedtoaggress]

But the NWO agenda seems quite long term. It has been many many decades of incremental and patient fruition. Your quote implies the opposite - that non statesmen are only short-term legislators.

That's because what you're calling "the NWO agenda" is the natural growth of government and consolidation of power.

[anaconda]

That's because what you're calling "the NWO agenda" is the natural growth of government and consolidation of power.

I get that. My question is: What compels nearly every member of Congress to vote in lock step for this "consolidation?" As I have stated, I have no problem understanding how a Congressman would legislate on behalf of his key donors, but I would think that money would be largely local to the particular congressional district. So I see why mining interests would donate to send a representative to congress to legislate on their behalf. What I don't understand is why that representative would want to vote for a police state or for selling the country out to offshore bankers.

[noneedtoaggress]

I get that. My question is: What compels nearly every member of Congress to vote in lock step for this "consolidation?" As I have stated, I have no problem understanding how a Congressman would legislate on behalf of his key donors, but I would think that money would be largely local to the particular congressional district. So I see why mining interests would donate to send a representative to congress to legislate on their behalf. What I don't understand is why that representative would want to vote for a police state or for selling the country out to offshore bankers.

Like I said, it's because politics is power games. It's about political influence and pressure. You scratch my back, I scratch yours and fighting over power. Read more of the link I posted, Ron talks about his experiences and ideas on politics in it.


It's funny how they beg, beg, beg for your votes treat you like royalty... and when they get it suddenly you're pretty much just some irrelevant subject while they go off and play politics with the ruling class, dumbly steering a monopoly on the use of force in society like it's some kind of toy.

[mosquitobite]

I get that. My question is: What compels nearly every member of Congress to vote in lock step for this "consolidation?" As I have stated, I have no problem understanding how a Congressman would legislate on behalf of his key donors, but I would think that money would be largely local to the particular congressional district. So I see why mining interests would donate to send a representative to congress to legislate on their behalf. What I don't understand is why that representative would want to vote for a police state or for selling the country out to offshore bankers.

Everyone has a price. Bribery...prostitutes...etc. Once they "got them" they got 'em.

My big conspiracy is that is exactly what Bohemian Grove type stuff is about. Pictures of married men with prostitutes (male &/or female), etc. Stuff to keep 'em in line.

[Feeding the Abscess]

That's because what you're calling "the NWO agenda" is the natural growth of government and consolidation of power.

When I first started traveling down this road five years ago, I opposed the NWO agenda and the secretive cabals and all that. As I began to learn more about the nature of government, I started to see the forest instead of the trees.

[anaconda]

When I first started traveling down this road five years ago, I opposed the NWO agenda and the secretive cabals and all that. As I began to learn more about the nature of government, I started to see the forest instead of the trees.

Would you be willing to provide me with an example or two of this? Of situations where what you first thought was a sinister globalist agenda by secretive cabals, morphed into some other form or structure? Or other causes and effects? Or whatever you saw as key differences? Or where the notion of sinister secretive cabals evaporated? Thanks!

[Pericles]

(1) Its good to be the king.

(2) The constant increase in scope and power of government at the federal level means that practically every issue is going to be impacted by federal government actions, thus there is less and less of politics at the local level that matters. That is why you see campaign contributions to every candidate from every group tying to influence governmental action at the federal level.

100 years ago, a person in Texas cared little about who was a Rep or Senator for New York - there was no impact on his life or business from the federal government. This is no longer the case. When my free speech rights mean that I can send money to every Rep and Sen in the country, it legalizes the corrupting influence of money in the political process. Easiest way to fix that is to allow on contributions to candidates for which you are eligible to vote. When I can only contribute money to someone running for Rep in my district, Sen in my state, and POTUS, you would fundamentally change the nature of politics in this country.