If the State Is Our Nanny, What Are We?

David C. Stolinsky, MD
July 20, 2009

Controversy swirls around the Cap-and-Trade Bill, which has already passed the House, and the Health-Care Bill, which Democrat leaders plan to pass before the August recess.

Cap-and-Trade, more accurately called “Cap-and-Tax,” purports to control carbon emissions in order to control global warming. In fact, global warming has not occurred in this decade, probably because of decreased energy output by the sun. And many leading scientists believe that human activity contributes little to warming. Besides, no matter what Americans do, if the huge populations of China and India do not participate − which they won’t − atmospheric carbon dioxide will continue to rise.

If Cap-and-Trade will do little to control the climate, what will it control? Us. It will control and tax most sources of energy, which will add to the cost of virtually everything. The bill has been called the biggest tax increase in our history − disguised as a way to “help the environment.”

Then we have the Health-Care Bill, which purports to cover the uninsured, while leaving untouched those who are satisfied with their insurance. In fact, when Investor’s Business Daily tried to read the thousand-page bill, it was necessary only to reach Page 16 before finding that private health insurance will end. And the impartial Congressional Budget Office states that costs will be overwhelming. Revealingly, members of Congress want to exempt themselves from the law and keep their current plan.

But beyond these practical objections to cap-and-trade and nationalized health care, there looms the real problem: These two bills will be the death-blow to our freedom. How can people call themselves free, when every product and activity that uses energy − and that is almost every product and activity − will be regulated from Washington? How can people call themselves free, when the health care − that is, the lives − of themselves and their loved ones will be controlled from Washington?

On a deeper level, how can people call themselves adults, when the major decisions that affect their lives are no longer made by them, but by their nanny? Instead of pressure to grow up and become independent, self-sufficient adults, as was the case since the beginning of our nation, now there will be pressure − no, compulsion − to remain dependent children.

There is something repulsive about full-grown men and women who want to be treated like children.

When I was a child, I read about King Arthur and imagined myself a knight in armor, going around righting wrongs. I never imagined myself a serf digging in the dirt, or a prisoner in a dungeon. Then I grew up and realized that the Middle Ages were really grim.

Liberals read about socialism and imagine themselves members of the central committee, going around righting wrongs. They never imagine themselves victims of a suffocating bureaucracy, or sick people dying while on a waiting list. But liberals haven’t grown up. They haven’t realized that socialism can be really grim.

Much of what passes for liberalism today could be described as childishness. Obvious examples are socialism, pacifism and strict gun control.

Adults, especially citizens of a free country, see themselves as bearing the primary responsibility for protecting themselves and their families. But children – or subjects of an authoritarian regime – see themselves as powerless. They feel little responsibility for defending themselves or their families. This responsibility, and all the rights and powers that go with it, are assumed by adults in the case of children, and by the government in the case of those who infantilize themselves.

Like children, they believe that if they imagine something good, they actually did something good:

• Bilingual education is “good” because its proponents mean well. That it doesn’t enhance language skills is irrelevant.

• Welfare programs are “good” because their backers are “caring.” That some of the programs aggravate family breakup goes unnoticed.

• High taxes are “good” because they “help the poor.” Ignored is that high taxes force both parents to work and minimize time with kids. Also ignored is that high taxes transfer spending decisions to the government, downgrading citizens into children with an allowance.

• Socialized medicine is “good” because of “universal coverage.” But if our health-care system is “broken,” why does America have the best cancer survival statistics? Britain’s National Health Service, with its waiting times and rationed care, results in lower cancer survival. Patients have “universal coverage” – with six feet of dirt.

Europeans have an excuse for believing in a powerful government. They lived under kings for centuries. The French, Germans and Russians recall that their nations were more powerful when they were ruled by kings. They yearn to be taken care of by an authority figure. But America was built by individual initiative. What’s our excuse?

Small children are egocentric. So are the liberal elite. To them, other people are less important than their own pet theories. They ignore untold suffering, while pursuing socialism, pacifism and other impractical notions. They even want to reduce the tax deduction for charitable contributions, which will inevitably reduce charitable contributions. This will hurt the needy, but no matter − all good must be seen to come from Washington, not from individuals. Egotists hate to share the spotlight with anyone. They hunger to be in control, regardless of whether what they control is improving or deteriorating.

Small children imagine that inanimate objects can be bad. Toddlers sometimes shake their fingers at broken toys, saying, “Bad, bad!” Similarly, many liberals believe that guns are bad, so they attempt to disarm the law-abiding – while ignoring effective programs that put armed criminals in prison. They believe that nuclear weapons are bad, so they attempt to disarm their own country – while opposing a defense against the missiles of potential enemies.

No one fears nuclear weapons in the hands of Britain or France. Democracies rarely threaten one another, just as law-abiding citizens rarely misuse guns. But recognizing this obvious truth would force liberals to face the fact that it is not evil objects but evil people who are to be feared. This in turn would force them to accept standards by which to judge people. Since they have abandoned such standards, identifying evil people becomes impossible.

Inanimate objects are the only things left to blame.

Closely allied to childishness is self-righteousness. Those who believe their motives are “good” may feel that others can sense this – as if they walked around with haloes. They believe their hearts are “pure,”” so nobody will attack them – not muggers, not terrorists.

This is a form of blame-the-victim: “If I don’t own a gun, I won’t be robbed. If we don’t build a missile defense, we won’t be attacked.” Such thinking is emotional, not logical, and is hard to overcome by logical argument.

Children have a right to sleep peacefully, secure in the knowledge that others will protect them. Adults, especially citizens of a free nation, have no such luxury.

The worst effect of liberalism is not a host of laws and regulations designed to control every aspect of life. Laws can be repealed.

The worst effect of liberalism is not an increasingly intrusive government. Governments can be voted out of office.

The worst effect of liberalism is the regression of citizens from self-sufficient adults into dependent children who rely on a parentified government to take care of them and make important decisions for them.

Naiveté is charming in a child. It is unattractive and dangerous in an adult. What makes us think that the nanny state, to which we surrender our autonomy, will protect our best interests − or even protect our lives? What makes us think that the apparently benign nanny will not turn out to be the wicked witch? Before it is too late, let us fire the nanny and GROW UP.

Dr. Stolinsky writes on political and social issues. He can be contacted at dstol@prodigy.net.

www.stolinsky.com