Health Care “Reform”
We at the VoidMaster Continuum espouse a decidedly Libertarian political bent. Our rather narrow gamut runs from Minimalism to outright anarchy. Collectively, our only true commonality is the notion that the less government there is, the better.
Certainly you could prowl these pages and find plenty of political commentary. So by no means do we present or even suggest that we are non-political. However, as we rarely concern ourselves with the affairs of state and indeed, do not tolerate the state interfering in our affairs, we rarely get involved in any political system.
That said, events now create for us a moral imperative to become involved. Specifically, as the title of this article implies, we wish to put forth our position on the garbage the U. S. Congress and Presidency are currently trying to pass off as Health Care Reform.
As Tony is our resident author, he will present the balance of this article. But rest assured; herein he speaks for us all.
The VoidMaster Continuum
***
The Coming Tyranny, Part I
*
Let’s get one thing straight from the start. Yes, the United States desperately needs some sort of reform to its health care system. The cost of even the most basic medical care is unjustifiably expensive. There are many reasons for this, but ultimately most of it comes down to greed. And what doctors charge for their services is really the least of the problem. The primary culprits are the health insurance industry and for-profit hospital management corporations. But that is not the scope of this article.
Rather, it is my intent to point out that what the U. S. Congress plans to begin debating after the Thanksgiving holiday is not health care reform. If anything, it is a welfare package for the insurance industry. This is borne out by the fact that the legislation the Senate chose to debate does nothing to cap insurance premiums or for that matter, the cost of medical services. Without doing both, it cannot help anyone other than the insurance industry and its stockholders.
There are so many things wrong with the threatened legislation; where does one begin? Most of the haggling and arguing that’s going on centers around whether or not to include the so-called “public option.” Those on the right scream and bellow that such a thing is socialism. Many are quick to point out that private insurance could not possibly compete with any sort of government run coverage.
I suspect they are correct. And yes, a public option very much is socialism. But frankly, it would still beat the dirt out of the status quo. That’s how badly things have become in the world of health care. Further, if the insurance industry cannot stay in business without raping and pillaging… Do I really need to finish that sentence?
The greatest single thing that Congress could do to reform health care in America would be to outlaw health care insurance. Instead, they are planning to do just the opposite. They intend to make it a criminal offense for you to exist and not have health insurance. And that is what makes passage and enforcement of this legislation an act of tyranny.
I spoke of how those on the right bemoan the socialist nature of the public option. Likewise, those on the left just as correctly point out that, without such an option, the insurance industry has absolutely no incentive to do anything differently from what they have been doing all along. And just in case you’re so disgusted by all of this that you don’t want to play along, they plan to make your participation mandatory. Depending upon which version of the bill might actually make it into law, you could face a fine as high as a quarter of a million dollars and up to five years in prison—for not having health care insurance.
Even the most liberal version calls for a $750 a year tax penalty for non-compliance.
Don’t you just love that word “liberal”? Even if you consider yourself one, are you? From what I have seen firsthand, the majority of people who call themselves liberal are about as liberal as a Stasi lieutenant. They’re not really liberals. They’re leftists hiding behind the mask of contemporary liberalism. There is nothing liberal about them.
That’s not just my opinion. One can understand why the Republicans—those champions of big business—want an individual mandate to create a captive market for their clients. But just what’s up with the Democrats? Those supposed champions of civil liberties are clamoring the loudest for the individual mandate! And that clearly proves that they are not liberals, but merely leftists pushing a socialist agenda.
Even if every other aspect of the proposed law were wonderful, the very presence of the individual mandate makes it bad, wrong, evil and an affront to everything the United States of America claims to stand for. And certainly little else about that bill is good, much less wonderful.
*
So then, you might ask just what would any self respecting anarchist propose? You might be surprised.
There is a fellow crusader from a different “network” who goes by the moniker, SearingTruth (that’s a link to his web site, by the way). Here is what he had to offer.
***
The Health Destruction Industry has bribed both Republicans and Democrats to write a bill which requires every American to pay them for “health insurance”, while they are left to continue just as before, with only a change of window dressing.
My friends, corporations are not here to be nice, or compassionate, or to do the “right” thing. They are here to make a profit.
And that is their just and rightful place.
Which is why we should never allow them to participate in our police, fire, health care, or military institutions.
Because these are institutions that ensure our basic human infrastructure, supporting our fundamental human rights, and should not be reliant upon profitability.
And this is the basic precept of justice that Obama has failed to defend, that Republicans never embraced, and that Democrats abandoned without notice sometime within the last three decades.
*
You can see where he’s going with this. And I tend to agree in concept except that all of those institutions (save for health care so far) are run by The State. My knee-jerk response was of course to reject this suggestion out of hand. After all, when my avowed objective in life is to eliminate government in any form, how can I in good conscious give the state control of yet more?
The problem is, this leaves only two alternatives. One is to continue to allow profit driven entities to administer health care, thus furthering the raping and pillaging of those individuals to whom such entities ought to be grateful for their survival. Ultimately that they are not so endeared is the problem here. And there is no way to legislate gratitude. Good customer service does not involve a gun.
The other alternative is simply to do away with health care altogether. Hmmm. Not an option, either. So what does that leave? Not just a public option, but health care as a public realm!
This challenged me to my very foundations. Many could attest to my utter lack of patience, indeed, tolerance for those who find denial a convenient place to hide. And yet I was on the very verge myself. For there just simply had to be another way.
This required deeper consultation. We of the Continuum had a meeting. And given the prospect that young children may get to read this article, I will not elaborate upon the details. Suffice it to say, there was some yelling involved. Here is what we came away with.
*
Just what is it that anarchists, Libertarians and Minimalists find so terrible about government?
First of all is law—law itself, that whole “rule of law” thing. Ask anyone who works in the field; lawyers, judges, even cops. They will all tell you the same thing. The law is not about right and wrong. The only time those words even come up in a court of law is usually during debate over someone’s sanity. Aside from that, the only thing that is ever considered in a court of law is whether a thing is legal or illegal. Whether it is right or wrong never, ever matters to the law.
Government seems completely incapable of operating within the parameters of right vs. wrong and only within the letter of the law. That’s one very big thing. But even that by itself might not garner the state the depths of distrust and revulsion we tend to have for it. The greater thing by far is its arrogance.
You see, the VoidMaster Continuum does not and has never sought the elimination of groups. Nor do we think the concept of group inherently bad. Government is but another type of group; and a group, but a plurality of individuals. As with any group, its sole rationale for existence lies in its service to those individuals who comprise it. But the operators of a government seldom see it that way.
They invariable come to believe that the government is the sovereign power and those individuals whom they regard as its citizens, mere subjects—obliged to obey its every command. Even this vile mindset might be forgiven if only participation was optional. But it never is. Rather, every government that exists or ever has seems convinced that its subjects are obliged to participate and thus, to obey. This is what we cannot and will not tolerate.
In the end, it does not matter what sort of label you apply to a thing. Call it government, the state, the people—call it the Boys’ Club of America if you so choose. The moment participation is obligatory and assumed, it is tyranny. Ultimately it is not the objective of the Continuum to eliminate groups, including state. Rather it is to put them in perspective. Any group, all groups, including most especially government must necessarily understand and accept that it does not exist to rule its member, but to serve them.
Suddenly SearingTruth’s take on public heath care becomes clear. Our, primarily my original reaction to the notion was colored by a mere buzzword and nothing more. The prospect of lumping health care in with law enforcement demanded a negative response, but that it seems was a conditioned response and not one well thought out.
First, put the concept of law enforcement into perspective. It is unnecessary in its current form. Of that, we remain certain. At the very least its numbers should be reduced to only those few elected officials holding such roles as Sheriff or Chief of Police. And even then, the need for them is questionable to us.
Simply put, there remains necessary one and only one law for our species: Inflict no material harm upon another. And it has one and only one exception: self-defense. The question is always asked: Who enforces this law? And the answer remains: People with guns.1
I do not mean police or military. For true justice cannot be carried out by people who slap badges upon their chests, and under the presumption of having authority over anyone they meet, prowl the streets looking for trouble. That approach can only result in one outcome. They always find trouble.1
1I elaborate further upon this theme in “ Use a Gun!”
There are plenty of other purposes for the group besides standing guard over that which is not theirs. A group will more efficiently extinguish a house fire than will a single person. Likewise, building and maintaining a highway is really a bit much for one man. And especially given the advance technological state of medical science, it is better administered by a team than by a single practitioner.
Administering a group of such teams should indeed be handled by your group—the one that you have joined of your own volition and for the purpose of serving you. It should not be administered by someone else’s group—one that in the service of its members, pursues a profit but not necessarily on your behalf. In this context, yes, the public administration of health care seems the only safe and rational way to do the job.
Whether or not you or I wish to call that group government is of little import in the end. What is of absolute import is that any such group remember its place. It must exist to serve and not to rule.
This brings us full circle and back to the travesty making its way through the halls of Congress, poorly disguised as health care reform. I can think of but two things about it that are good. It prohibits insurers from denying coverage on the basis of preexisting conditions and it prohibits them from dropping your coverage if you file a claim. Even then, these two “bright spots” would not be necessary if only the groups in question were righteous in their pursuit of service. They are not. Both are motivated by greed and each seeks to control rather than to serve.
Even this could perhaps be dismissed as but a waste of time and resources. Instead, it is far worse. Participation is mandatory. And thus, we are commonly threatened by tyranny. We have a moral obligation, if only to ourselves, to depose it at all cost.
Toward that end, I admonish us all, to the degree that we are able, to put a stop to this madness, perhaps working within the system, hopefully in a peaceable fashion. This is far more desirable than any alternative. Nonetheless, I cannot close without reminding all of this fact. The likes of the individual mandate contained within all of the pending health care bills is exactly the sort of thing that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution was written to address—should it come to that.
Now lest anyone wish to take my words as license to violence, consider a quote by Thomas Jefferson.
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”
Notice that Mr. Jefferson lists patriots first. There is a reason for that. Let us address this matter peaceably while there is still time.
*
Copyright © 2009, The VoidMaster Continuum, All rights reserved.