If we cared nothing for our own freedom, we might be inclined to accept the welfare state’s ministrations with gratitude, but even then our contentment would be disturbed by the large extent to which the government fails to deliver what it promises. To be blunt, the government’s protection is largely fraudulent. Officials pretend to protect citizens and to promote social harmony while actually accomplishing the opposite. Thus, the government’s affirmative action programs have actually fostered racial acrimony and conflict rather than racial harmony.
The environmental laws have caused many billions of dollars to be squandered in mandated actions for which costs vastly exceed benefits. And the Food and Drug Administration, far from improving public health, has caused (at least) hundreds of thousands of excess deaths and untold human suffering. It is bad enough that citizens are viewed as sheep; it is worse that they are sheared and slaughtered.
Fifty years ago, Bertrand de Jouvenel wrote, “The essential psychological characteristic of our age is the predominance of fear over self-confidence…. Everyone of every class tries to rest his individual existence on the bosom of the state and tends to regard the state as the universal provider.” But this protection costs the public far more than the high taxes that fund its provision because “if the state is to guarantee to a man what the consequences of his actions shall be, it must take control of his activities…to keep him out of the way of risks.” In the interval since Jouvenel wrote those lines, the demand for government protection has risen to new heights, and the corresponding
==Against Leviathan: Government Power and a Free Society (Robert Higgs)
As Michael Gold of the New Masses put it in response to the poet Ezra Pound’s support for fascism: “When a cheese goes putrid, it becomes limburger, and some people like it, smell and all. When the capitalist state starts to decay, it goes fascist.”
==Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning (Jonah Goldberg)
Rather frightening words that cannot be dismissed as some fringe element or because this architect and “sustainable development” guru is not operating within the government. His ideas are what the government and its control of the environmental movement as it is structured, manipulated and propagandized is all about–Fascism. There is no room for individual rights nor democracy in these words.
It goes by many names: “sustainable development,” “smart growth,” “transit-oriented development,” to name a few. But development projects built under the banner of “sustainability” share the same elements: high-density residential housing and high-intensity commercial space (so-called mixed use) clustered near capital-intensive mass transit lines surrounded by government-owned “open space” and, increasingly, government-imposed “urban growth boundaries.” Regardless of where a sustainable-development project is located in the world, each tends to apply these elements.
There is nothing wrong with high-density housing or non-automobile mobility per se. The problem is that sustainability advocates use government to force their vision of tomorrow on others and, equally important, use government to restrict or eliminate alternative visions from being adopted. Individual private-property rights and local decision making give way to the priorities of international, national, state, and regional governmental bodies influenced by urban planners who believe their vision of the next 50 to 100 years is the correct vision and the only vision worth pursuing. Anyone who thinks differently, according to the planners, is wrong, selfish, wasteful, or all three, and must be silenced.