TANSTAFL

Who is my favorite author?

Michele will get this right in one. Some of you might remember. I admit it's not an easy question because I'm rarely to be found without one book or another in my hand and no one, not even me, can recall the name of every author whose material I've read. This one, though, is special. I converted to Christianity four years ago at the age of twenty-one and have, since then, tried to live my life according to the tennets of my religion with varying degrees of success. This author I have been reading since I was eight years old and loved both his stories and his philosophy since before I hit puberty.

Robert Anson Heinlein was born in Missouri in the early part of last century. His accomplishments are too numerous to note but he was most well known for his social-science fiction. His novels were noted for having (for the time) good hard science underpinnings and challenging social commentary on a variety of issues but perhaps most of all- a strong libertarian bent.

I'm reading one of his best-loved novels right now, a book called The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress. The novel's plot revolves around the revolt of a former penal colony on Luna and the establishment of a state on our moon. One of the primary characters is a spritely old revolutionary named Professor Bernardo de LaPaz. GREAT character; devlish old man professors are Heinlein's great archetype even beyond the cornucopia of intelligent, desirable and heroic women he writes (he had a thing for redheads, something I definitely share!).

Yes, Michele, you are a freaking redhead, quit arguing with me.

Anyway, Bernardo de LaPaz is, like Professor DuBois, Jubal Harshaw and other characters in that vein, an outlet for many philosophies that Heinlein either held or felt were worthy of serious consideration. De LaPaz throughout the book professes the philosophy of rational anarchy. That is that he recognizes the disease of government is unavoidable and necessary to create a livable environment but should be kept starved and inefficient in order to avoid oppressive government.

I have held this general principle dear for many years now. I do believe that with regard to domestic affairs the government should interfere as little as possible. Ford and the other American auto-makers are going bankrupt. It's a fact, I'm sorry for the workers who are employed by them but the fact is that they make inferior products in nearly every respect and do not charge any less for them. This effort to bail them out is purely propaganda- doomed to fail with littel to no real economic benefit. Thus it is with just about all government economic intervention.

That being said, de LaPaz tries to illegalize involuntary taxation in the founding of the nation on the moon. He makes several very good arguments against the precedent of taxes, but doesn't answer one question. Who pays for defense?

I think Robert was a little in love with the concept of Citizen Soldiers (he is postively SCATHING in his criticism of conscription) and rallying around the flag when it comes time for war. Of course everyone will rally to their naiton's call in time of war, right? Right? Guys.... guys? Hey, where is everybody? Oh, that's right, they're mostly in college, smoking weed and playing Xbox, because our society is degenerate.

Yeah. I wish this principle were workable, oh God how I wish it were. But it's not. A society, even one as weak and decadent as modern day America, can usually produce the bare minimum number of warm bodies even in a volunteer military to provide for the national defense, but asking the populace to willingly part with their money to address threats that aren't blatantly staring them in the face? HA.

And the concept of Citizen Soldiers, in terms of calling up reservists and other-than-professional soldiers is nearly worthless in modern terms. Yep. Worthless. Oh, we use Guard and Reserve on deployment and I truly honor their service as much as anyone else's, but we have to put them through months of training before they are useful and even then it's understood they're almost never of comparable quality to an average regular Army formation. This is not an insult to the valor, patriotism or even martial skill of any individual within the Guard or Reserve but a true statement as to the inherent nature of part-time units.

There is nothing more expensive than the second best Army in the world. I don't remember who said it, but I'll take it as an axiom. Heinlein's assumptions would work in a society where everyone was like him, intelligent, courageous and patriotic. Willing to put aside whatever personal desires they might have and join the military any time their nation went to war, AND bright and determined enough to learn to be good, even elite, at whatever the military asked of them in a very short amount of time.

Since most of my countrymen do NOT fit that description, and no one truly wants a conscript army back, that means long-service volunteers, solely focused (professionally speaking) on waging war in all its myriad forms, and I do pray that this war has shown the institution for once and for all just how wildly varied war can be, though I doubt it in the long run. This means money for pay, training, equipment and maintenance (in that order I might add), even and perhaps for my purposes ESPECIALLY in times of peace.

Heinlein, through de LaPaz, says that people should not be forced to pay for things they don't want. This makes the rational-actor assumption. That if people want to be defended from the barbarian hordes, they'll pay for it. I think the current economic crisis more than highlights the fact that people do NOT act rationally when it comes to money. Anybody dumb enough to sign a variable-rate loan cannot be trusted with any mature adult decision, ergo, not someone to decide on the defense of the nation.

Well, then isn't that what they deserve? I mean if they're not willing to pay the price, shouldn't they get overrun by the barbarians?

Sure, except for that America is the best place on the planet and will be the last bastion of civilization to fall. Europe is already doomed (demography is destiny). So if we make taxes optional and let people "get what they deserve," that equation ends two or three generations from now with anyone who hasn't converted paying the dhimma and our great grand-daughters as "temporary wives" (for those of you unfamiliar with Islam's more charming tennets that last may be translated as whore or rape victim, depending on circumstance) for whatever shiek notices them first. Since space travel is disgustingly underdevoloped and if America falls Israel will be a smoking wasteland the day after, that leave nowhere to run except maybe Red China or (possibly) Japan and I don't think that a) I would want to live in either of those places and b) they will be taking too many refugees.

Don't believe in the threat? Come over here and say it to my face, jackass. You can find me on the eastern bank of the Southern Euphrates. No, not all Mulsims are evil, the MAJORITY are NOT evil. Doesn't matter. Most Germans weren't evil in 1939, most Southerners weren't evil in 1860, etc. etc. It was still necessary to go to war and not to fiddle around about WHO the enemy was when we knew damn well who they were.

The threat is real. Those fundamentalists who would see our very cutlure destroyed will not be placated by foreign aid and appeals to mutual-understanding. They do not believe in cultural relativisim, even though their allies in our own media and political system do. (Note: no violation of Article 88: I didn't mention a specific official, make your own assumptions). And if the populace of the Islamic world is unwilling to turn on those fundamentlists they will be shields, and then cannon fodder for those selfsame terrorists. I've seen it in micro here, you'll see it in macro if they are allowed to survive and grow unchecked.

So, painful as it is for me to disagree with a man I've admired since childhood; that money needs to be collected whether the people feel like it or not. I would support a tax-exemption for service. That seems just, people who have paid, or at least risked paying, in blood for the defense of their nation need not pay in cash anymore. Oh, that idea pisses people off, damn veterans getting off an a free ride just because they...oh, yeah, allow the continued existence of your entire way of life. Yeah.

Okay, I'm about out of steam. I think this concludes today's rant. I hope you've enjoyed.