Should the individual have more control?

“Fascist state control”, “Government controls us all” and “we have no freedom left” are words I often hear whenever there’s any debate at all related to when the Government wants to restrict or control something. People are calling for more individual freedom.

But what happens when we get more individual freedom? Is it freedom at all, or just another form of control?

I have noticed a certain trend going on in the world right now, where people seem to be under the impression that they can both have less regulations and simultaneously less corporate influence. But the two are mutually exclusive. As the government has more control, the corporations will have less control, and vice versa.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in the US, where the government by law cannot exact control over the people. This has lead to an interesting situation where corporations have been allowed to literally bribe politicians, fully legally. The pinnacle of the capitalistic society, where individual freedom is put first. And what are the results?

Internet is arbitrarily restricted. Healthcare costs more than most can afford. Electricity is among the most expensive in the world. Much of the land that used to be nature and forest is now barren. The list goes on for much, much longer. The point is that corporations now dictate the laws instead of the elected government and that is what we can expect when the government isn’t allowed to have control. In a big sense, major corporations have become the government.

“But that won’t happen everywhere” you say. Well, what happened in the UK after the privatisation wave? Corporations got more influence in the government and we now have more laws in the UK that benefits the corporations at the cost of the citizens. Corporation taxes went way down, more and more corporation services were moved to become tax funded and benefits and insurances went way down.

Same happened in Sweden, Denmark, Finland, France…

Some countries, like Sweden, have returned to a socialistic government that tries to give the power back to the people, but that can only happen if the people own the government, not the corporations.

The main thing people forget is that the government is made up of people who are there to protect their own interest. It’s up to you as a voter to make sure you vote for people who have YOU in their interest. Voting for someone who promises you beneficial circumstances only works if everything else they have done through their career is also beneficial to you.

But right now people vote for those who promises instant beneficial circumstances, while having done the exact opposite for their entire careers. People voted for Cameron, who promised tax breaks and better healthcare, despite his time as adviser to the treasury lead to the refusal of the UK government to accept the Euro, despite having joined the EMU (one of the key factors in the mid-90’s depression, as it left most of Europe severely underfunded), his time as adviser for the Home Secretary was lined with suggestions like reducing the quality of food in prisons, retirement homes and schools (which were still mostly state owned at the time) and just about his entire political career consisting of him stabbing his party members in the back to get higher on the ladder.

People voted for Trump because he promised a lot of good things, despite his very well known history of doing very bad things and showing absolutely no allegiance to anything but money.

Meanwhile, people refused to vote for Ed Miliband as they lost all confidence in him. What did he do? He ate a sandwich, someone took a picture at the exact right moment and he looks a bit odd as he’s chewing and it was plastered all over the front pages of several news papers

Howard Dean’s career was ruined at a rally while he was running for president, because of an enthusiastic scream that sounded a bit odd.

These are the things people think are important today, yet they cannot see the connection between giving the government less control and the people losing control of the government.

To end it all, I just want to point out to all the potential commenters that no, government control does not equate to fascism. Fascism is a very different thing, where the government first must be controlled by a very small group of people, often times only one person, who dictates all the laws of the country. A democratically elected government that has control over certain facilities in a nation is not fascism. Those who believe it is may want to take a refresher course in high school social sciences (or civics, for my fellow Brits).


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s