“An Immodest Proposal” (May 1982, OL)
Much has been made of Central America’s violent conflicts — the confrontations between “fascist right-wing dictatorships” and “communist inspired left-wing terrorists”. The proposed solutions for these American nations runs the gamut of emotion and ideology — from propping up the military regimes in power in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, to recognition and economic support for socialist Nicaragua and the struggling revolutionaries.
The most palatable course of action for the United States to take that I’ve heard so far is inaction. That is, we provide (the Union, that is, individuals may do as they please) no support for any actions and let matters take their course. This “course of inaction”, however, provides little hope for those Americans caught in the middle. All they have to look forward to is more of the same from the status quo, or, as in the case of Nicaragua, an exchange of despots.
While it may be too late for Nicaragua, and nearly too late for El Salvador, the problem of the remaining states just may be solvable by the same method used for the former republics of Vermont, Texas, California, and Hawaii. Annexation would insure Central America against (external) communist subversion and would free the people from (relative) despotic abuse.
The major obstacle within Central America to annexation, beyond strident nationalism, would be the reluctance of the generals and the aristocracy to exchange their authoritarian fiefdoms for a free democratic state government.
The people of Central America would also be less reluctant to accept absorption into the United States if we were to give a concrete demonstration of our belief in political equality. Therefore, prior to any consideration of annexation, statehood should be proffered to Guam and Puerto Rico. For too long, the Puerto Ricans and Guamanians have been disenfranchised Americans. Once done, we can invite the seven states of Central America into our republic with a clear conscience.
update 180108: While I remain an enthusiastic expansionist, and proponent of Puerto Rican Statehood, I also have plenty of sympathy for secessionists. Seven billion plus sovereign entities by latest reckoning… But, as long as a confederation remains a voluntary union, I’m in!
“Off with its head” (Wednesday, 20 October 1982, GT)
It is inevitable, during an election year, to hear the contenders argue about how best to reduce spending and save tax dollars. Republicans claim that Democrats are too fastidious with their scalpels, and Democrats charge that Republicans are too reckless with their cleavers.
They are both right as they insist that the other is using the wrong instrument. To cut bureaucratic fat you need neither a scalpel nor a cleaver, but a guillotine.
“Concern irrelevant” (Tuesday, 14 December 1982, GT)
“Those who deal and sell drugs (like beer, coffee, tobacco, and whiskey), and other hard drugs, care not for the person they sell to. Their only aim is to make easy money for themselves.”
Sound familiar? It should; with only a change of specific drugs, it is the same irrelevant statement as that made by your correspondent DM in your December 9 edition.
Does it really matter if a merchant cares about his customers? It may to some, but as for me, when I patronize Snarfway, BulkMart, or my friendly neighborhood marijuana connection, all I want is high quality merchandise at a competitive price. Genuine personal concern is not for sale at any price.
DM invokes “lack [of] respect for the law” as an indictment of the entrepreneur’s character. When the law violates our basic human rights to life, liberty, property, privacy, and the pursuit of happiness, then the law is unworthy of respect. As Frederic Bastiat taught us in 1850, the safest way to make sure that the laws are respected is to make them respectable.
There is no moral requirement for us to obey unrespectable laws. I would caution everyone against indiscrete disobedience, the state is more heavily armed than we are, and there are still plenty of zealous informers who would sell out your liberty.
“Valiant filibuster fails” (Monday, 27 December 1982, GT)
I never thought I’d find myself in bed with the North Carolina Senators Jesse Helms or John East, but politics is passing strange.
Like Mark Hatfield’s valiant stand against Jimmy Carter’s draft registration, Helms’ and East’s ferocious filibuster to protect the innocent from an omnivorous federal government proved futile, and the gasoline tax hike, in the midst of recession, has been inflicted upon the hapless American consumer.