Here’s a way to answer – and get around – the For Our Own Goodniks who use that line to justify their taking-away of our right to decide for ourselves:
Informed consent.
Whether it’s a car with – or without “safety” equipment – or a drug that has potential risks as well as a benefits, we get to decide for ourselves what’s best and (drum roll!) assume responsibility for the consequences our decisions. This could also be called adulting, something grown-ups were once considered capable of. But that was before the For Our Own Goodniks successfully enshrined perpetual (and mildly retarded) childhood upon adults. They did this to a great extent by positing what they style “societal costs”- which is nothing more than a new way to say collective responsibility. Their argument is that if X is not prevented from doing or not required to do (insert here; it can be just about anything) then “society” will ed up having to “pay the costs.”
This is true, assuming collectivism. Which assumes coercion. More on that in a minute.
An example of For Our Own Goodism – again, there are many – being the laws that require people to wear seatbelts and more to the point, require the car companies to install them – and so force people to buy them. The For Our Own Goodniks argument is that absent a legal requirement for car manufacturers to put seatbelts in every vehicle they make and a legal requirement that people wear them, some people would choose not to buy or wear them. This freedom to choose idea greatly affronts the For Our Own Goodniks; it is not enough for them that seatbelts -or air bags or back-up cameras and so on – be available to buy for those who want to buy them or that people would be free to make use of them, if they so chose.
It is the freedom to choose that the For Our Own Goodniks cannot abide – though they will never openly say so.
Instead, they say that “society” – by which they mean everyone – will end up paying the costs for the negative outcomes arising from allowing adulting, i.e., the freedom to choose. There are at least two false premises here, the first of which is the assumption of negative outcomes. It is taken as a given, for instance, that a driver who does not wear a seatbelt is going to be injured (or injured worse) in a crash. That is a possibility, certainly. But it is not a certainty; far from it. I myself am proof of this in that I never wear a seat belt – it’s the principle of the thing, if you’re asking why – and I am uninjured. I used to drive a VW Beetle – one of the real ones – in DC area traffic for years and was not injured.
I have gone 30-plus years without being injured despite not being “buckled up.”
This brings up the second false premise, which is this assertion that “society” will end up having to pay for the injuries I haven’t suffered as a result of not “buckling up.” This assumes – again! – that I am the kind of person who offloads his problems onto other people. Is there any evidence – any facts – to support this assertion? I’ve been a responsible adult for decades; meaning I have paid my own bills and thus been responsible for myself. You are probably a responsible adult as well and find it effronterous to be assumed irresponsible by the For Our Own Goodniks when all the facts and evidence indicate you are in fact a responsible adult.
The assumed irresponsible part bears harping on.
It is always assumed – by the For Our Own Goodniks – that we are both irresponsible and that our “irresponsibility” will lead to negative outcomes and that when these negative outcomes happen, we will leave “society” holding the bag; i.e., everyone else will end up having to pay for it.
Another faulty premise.
“Society” does not have to pay for anything unless “society” is made to pay for it. This is a very important distinction that is never made by the For Our Own Goodniks. Why should “society” – why should anyone – be left holding the bag for the consequences of someone else’s actions? This is morally unconscionable in at least two ways, the first being no one is responsible for the actions of anyone else because everyone else is not you. Only you are responsible for what you have done (or do not do). To assert control over another because you are worried about what they might do or not do is the very essence of For Our Goodnikism and the source of our societal bed-wetting perpetual mildly retarded eternal childhood.
The second is the loathsome doctrine that consequences are the obligation of those not responsible for them. Could anything be more unjust – and so immoral? You are made to pay exorbitant insurance costs because some other person (or many of them) chose to do things that imposed costs they get to offload onto you and others who had nothing to do with it. This sort of thing is only possible when the force of government is involved. Without it, each of us would have to deal with the negative consequences of what we choose to do or not do – assuming there are any – as well as enjoy the benefits, which are usually more real than the usually hypothetical consequences of choosing (as in our example) to not “buckle up.”
Many people are horrified by such adulting and the For Our Own Goodniks rely on this to perpetuate and further the infantilization of society, which redounds to their benefit because it provides the pretext for controlling chronological adults as if they were mildly retarded children who will never grow up.
That’s how we got to where we find ourselves. The way out is as simple – and as scary, to some – as leaving home for the first time, to make it on our own.
. . .
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.
We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!
Our donate button is here.
If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:
EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079
PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $25 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)
If you’d like a Baaaaa hat or other EPautos gear, see here!
I have been driving 46 years without a seatbelt have maybe 6 fines over that period period, have driven ATVs for 30 years with no helmet ,played hockey with no helmet for 55 years amazingly I am still here. The greater good is as commie as it gets.
Ps had to register my Quad once when I bought it, (1999) not once since. Not registered, no insurance and never a helmet…..the horror.
Great missive Eric,
James N mentioned the late great Walter Williams and I concur on that comparison. Also the late great Charley Reese used such logic…..if you are interested Keith Knight over at the Libertarian Institute uses such logic in a compelling way……I am stealing your term “For your own goodniks”……it’s a damn religion with destruction of human dignity as its dogma…..damn good column young lad.
Thanks, Giuseppe!
Maybe the bout with gout triggered something inside me!
“There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him.” Robert Heinlein
This column reminds me so much of the great Walter Williams. When confronted with the “argument” that society would bear the cost of someone’s poor decision-making, Williams would point out that concern was caused by socialism, not freedom.
That’s high praise, James – thank you!
Your writing style is similar to his. You apply irrefutable logic to your arguments and present your case in a manner that is easy for the layman to understand. Obviously, some will disagree, but their rebuttals will most likely be laced with fallacious arguments or an attack on your character.
Thanks, James!
I’ve always enjoyed identifying the principle and then applying it. It does not seem like rocket science – as the saying goes – to me. If X is wrong, then all iterations of X are also wrong. I suppose I read too much as a kid!
Being an adult requires responsibilities, and for many, that is simply too much. That is why Socialism and Communism are so popular, especially with the younger generation. They did not grow up with the “duck under your desk” drills back in the day. So either government-run system solves many perceived problems for them: No responsibilities, and they get taken care of-or so they mistakenly believe. And they will gladly try to force the rest of us into such a system “for our own good”, because, well being a grown up is too hard for too many of them, and will insist the rest of us be children-in-adult-bodies just like them.
Both my daughters were living in Spain 6 years ago. My youngest tripped and broke her elbow. Spain’s social medicine fixed her up and with little cost to her. My oldest daughter just had her first child in Spain last year. She pays for an upgraded health plan and her child cost to have her were $100.00. My daughters both believe in socialized medicine although my youngest is getting a dose of it now living in England.
I tried to explain that, yes, it must be nice to live where they can divert more tax revenues to pay for such nice benefits, but Spain lives under the security umbrella provided mostly by others and in general their geographical location, and the USA’s interest in keeping Europe free as a trading partner. Spain on its own is a vulnerable country previously taken over by the Muslims and if not for Charles Martel they whole of Europe would be worshipping Allah.
As for our health insurance…on the road to Marxism. It is self-serve and you better become adept and reading charts and knowing when you need to get your tests for cancer. Denying claims is now first business of model of health insurance. That SOB Mangione who shot the Insurance Executive is becoming some sort of folk hero for committing murder. It appears he may have had motivation in his mother was denied coverage and died. The Marxist media will blame the system not the person committing the act. This was all part of Obama’s plan to make private insurance into a greedy oligopoly (they already were) which would conveniently become the reason for national healthcare.
I can only speak of my experiences with United Health Care (which I would not touch with a ten-foot pole).
Although I cannot agree with the “solution” the United Health Care shooter provided, the loss of life being unacceptable, it is easy to see how frustration could build up from the unconscionable practices this “health care” organization operates under.
I had United Health Care through my employer that I was paying for myself ($360.00 bi-weekly). EVERY SINGLE CLAIM that I submitted was denied, and even on appeal was denied again. It was only when I took my stack of bills to my employer’s HR department that they finally paid the bills. Of course, the HR people could see the fire in my eyes. I would never have gone to the extreme that the United Health Care shooter went to, but the frustration with this criminal “health care” organization was real.
Rafal Ganowicz had it right
https://ifunny.co/picture/in-1967-polish-mercenary-rafal-ganowicz-was-asked-what-it-j2xuVShN4
Hi Anarchyst,
I had United Health at my former employer as well. My wife’s doctor wanted a mammogram done and the criminals denied payment. We paid out of pocket, then we get called on by Cobra that we owe them the money for the test. Morel of the story, after Cobra gal heard my wife out, she apologized and said United was the worst healthcare insurance they have deal with and would take this claim up personally to see we get paid back. Still waiting.
Private or public insurance is a cartel. I don’t buy health insurance. They can take it where the sun doesn’t shine. I would rather die in a ditch than get involved with the whitecoats as well.
A large part of the problem is that the USA government has found a partial end-run around Constitutional restrictions on what it is permitted to do by using NGOs and corporations to do what government is prohibited from doing.
This is no different than allowing governments and NGOs to write legislation themselves with congress rubber-stamping approval.
Allowing NGOs and corporations to be considered legal “persons” is the problem.
Correction:
The second statement should read: This is no different than allowing corporations and NGOs to write legislation themselves with congress rubber-stamping approval.
If it wasn’t against the Law,
Everyone would be fucking dogs.
Nope. Enough people find that repugnant to round up and say nobody would be.
No.
If it wasn’t illegal, the people who do would maybe be slightly less secretive about it. Maybe a tiny handful of people who had been deterred would join their ranks. But 99.99% of everyone still isn’t going to, because they don’t want to, regardless of what the law says.
Paraphrasing President Jefferson Davis, all I want is to be left alone.
‘This sort of thing is only possible when the force of government is involved.’ — eric
ALPRs are a product whose only customer is governments. No, wait:
‘Hundreds of AI-powered automated license plate reading cameras paid for by Lowe’s and Home Depot and stationed in the hardware stores’ parking lots are being fed into a massive surveillance system that law enforcement can access, according to records obtained using a public records request.
‘The records, obtained from the Johnson County, Texas Sheriff’s Office by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and shared with 404 Media, show the sheriff’s office is able to tap into Flock license plate reading cameras at 173 different Lowe’s locations around the U.S. and that it can tap into cameras and gunshot-detecting microphones at dozens of Home Depot stores within Texas.
‘Flock’s automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras are stationed along roads or at entrances to parking lots around the United States, and constantly scan the license plates of cars that drive by. Because there are Flock cameras around the country, Flock often has a snapshot of people’s movements which police can search, typically without a warrant.’
‘Government agencies that have Flock cameras can choose to contribute their data to either a statewide or nationwide network, meaning cops around the state or country can access them. Flock told 404 Media that Flock cameras operated by private companies have more restrictive sharing options.’
https://www.404media.co/home-depot-and-lowes-share-data-from-hundreds-of-ai-cameras-with-cops/
You can imagine why big box stores use ALPRs: to combat organized retail theft rings. But when the cops can tap this data, they can use for other purposes: nailing illegal migrant workers; ticketing you for an expired registration. It’s like shooting fish in a barrel.
As was said in the movie “The Outlaw Josie Wales”: “They’re aint no end to doing good”. As we live in a world where people insist on “doing good” and saying its all part of the social contract is why “they” felt could get away with forcing their gene therapy drugs on us and a majority of the populace rolled up their sleeves willingly or unwillingly but roll them up they did.
Live Free or Die was said for a reason. Have we forgotten that reason? I suspect many have and that’s why “they” knew many would roll up their sleeves.
Forcing “goodness” unto other is not doing good but evil.